On 7/1/22 2:27 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),> "waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:> >>From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:>>>> It's quite likely that Trumpattempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about. >>
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: > > > >It's quite likelythat Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. > > > >Per Mulvaney, such
On 7/1/22 2:27 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
"team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
1. it isn't a witch hunt, except to trumpers.
2. trump's word is worthless.
3. de santis is as much of a shitbucket as trump.
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
"team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
On 7/1/22 2:27 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
"team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
1. it isn't a witch hunt, except to trumpers.
2. trump's word is worthless.
3. de santis is as much of a shitbucket as trump.
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about. >>
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
"
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former president.
team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
Emminently credible hearsay. Right.
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which
may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he
committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of
Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most
worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as
"eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on
Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President
Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president
against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in
relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's
testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that
hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former
president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one
real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or
credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And
it is the one that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming
toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that
January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "team
player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a
reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages
during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that
people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate
witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is
obstruction of justice."
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural
noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group
holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind,
and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The
question is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not
sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a
good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win
sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
On 7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>> from him anyway.
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which >>>>> may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he
committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of
Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most
worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as >>>>> "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on >>>>> Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President
Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president >>>>> against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in
relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's >>>>> testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that
hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former >>>>> president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one
real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or
credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And >>>>> it is the one that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming >>>>> toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that
January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "team
player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a
reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages >>>>> during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that
people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate
witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is
obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural
noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group
holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind,
and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The
question is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not >>> sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a
good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win
sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
I'd love to see Trump convicted of this one:
18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws
thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and *shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.*
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
--
* I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 09:44:35 UTC-3, Keyser Sze wrote:> On 7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: > > On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> >From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in
sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a > >>> good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win > >>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never > >>> have to deal with his toxicinfluence again. > >>> > >> > >> The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is > >> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one > >> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th > >>
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 10:04:30 UTC-3, Justan Ohlphart wrote:> True North <prince...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r > > On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 09:44:35 UTC-3, Keyser Sze wrote:> On 7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: > > On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM,gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (
real threat to former President > >>>>> Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of > >>>>> obstruction of justice. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president > >>>>> against claims that he did "worried about. > >>>>> > >>>>> He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as > >>>>> "eminently credible." > >>>>> > >>>>> The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on > >>>>> Wednesday that in his view the
revealed one > >>>>> real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or > >>>>> credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And > >>>>> it is the one that should most worry the former president." > >>>>> > >>>>> He"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that > >>>>> hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former > >>>>> president," Mulvaney wrote. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
against a person or group > >>> holding unorthodox or unpopular views. > >>> > >>> I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its > >>> implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, > >>> and the mind of many others,/?wiCH ?h?nt/ > >>> nounhistorical > >>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural > >>> noun: witchhunts > >>> > >>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. > >>> b) informal: a campaign directed
True North <prince...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:rwrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> >From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 09:44:35 UTC-3, Keyser Söze wrote:> On 7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: > > On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com>
hearing motions by then. > >> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in > >> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to > >> present a defense. > >> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece ofhis base. > >> I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit > >> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the > >> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. > >> The court would still be
Do you lie awake at night dreaming up new ways to suck Fat Harry's
arse?
--
lets go Brandon...
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 10:04:30 UTC-3, Justan Ohlphart wrote:wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> >From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney
True North <prince...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 09:44:35 UTC-3, Keyser Sze wrote:> On 7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: > > On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com>
"eminently credible." > >>>>> > >>>>> The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on > >>>>> Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President > >>>>> Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of > >>>>>obstruction of justice. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president > >>>>> against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in > >>>>> relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty > >>>>>
credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And > >>>>> it is the one that should most worry the former president." > >>>>> > >>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming > >>>>> toward the end of thehearing consisting of two messages that > >>>>> January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their > >>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "team > >>>>> player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as
wasn't running in 2024, this > >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away > >>>> from him anyway. > >>> > >>> === > >>> > >>> witch-hunt > >>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ > >>> nounhistorical > >>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural > >>> noun: witchhunts > >>> > >>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. > >>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group > >>> holding unorthodox or unpopular views. > >>> > >>> I
we never > >>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. > >>> > >> > >> The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is > >> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one > >> after he left office and now youare hanging your hat on the 14th > >> amendment) > >> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? > >> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? > >> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by > >> margins too
defense. > >> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has > >> always been surrounded by lawyers. > > > > Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. > > It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". > > > > > >> I'd love tosee Trump convicted of this one: > > 18 U.S. Code 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection > > Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or > insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws > thereof, or gives aid
Do you lie awake at night dreaming up new ways to suck Fat Harry's
arse?
--
lets go Brandon...
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
SNERK!
Knew I was referring to all y'all?
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>> from him anyway.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >> >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >> >>>> from him anyway.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> > wrote:> >On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> >
of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. > >>>>> > >>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about. > >>>>> > >>>>> He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminentlyFrom an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: > >>>>> > >>>>> It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director
Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." > >>>>> > >>>>> "Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote. > >>>>> > >Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president." > >>>>> > >>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messagesMulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
unpopular views. > >>> > >>> I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best tonoun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts > >>> > >>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. > >>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or
The court would still be hearing motions by then. > >> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in > >> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to > >> present a defense. > >> Trump may be a piece of shitbut he is a rich piece of shit who has > >> always been surrounded by lawyers. > >> > > > >Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. > >It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com>waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> >
Wrote in message:r
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> > wrote:> >On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "
of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. > >>>>> > >>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about. > >>>>> > >>>>> He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimonyFrom an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: > >>>>> > >>>>> It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director
as "eminently credible." > >>>>> > >>>>> The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction ofjustice. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
should most worry the former president." > >>>>> > >>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving theirdepositions. The messages included allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the
person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. > >>> > >>> I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is/?wiCH ?h?nt/ > >>> nounhistorical > >>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts > >>> > >>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. > >>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th > >> amendment) > >> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? > >> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? > >> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in theprimaries by > >> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at > >> his base. > >> I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit > >> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the > >>
upset the balance.https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%present a defense. > >> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has > >> always been surrounded by lawyers. > >> > > > >Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. > >It's all "Russia, Russia,Russia".> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was > pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch > and started a war on Biden's watch.===Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to
YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING.
On 7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:I'd love to see Trump convicted of this one:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>> from him anyway.
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which
may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he
committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of
Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most
worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as >>>>>> "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on >>>>>> Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President
Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president >>>>>> against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in
relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's >>>>>> testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that
hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former >>>>>> president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one
real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or
credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And >>>>>> it is the one that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming >>>>>> toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that
January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to being a "team
player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a
reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages
during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that
people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate
witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is
obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural
noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group
holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind,
and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The
question is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not >>>> sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a
good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win
sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws
thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and *shall be
incapable of holding any office under the United States.*
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 06:20:06 -0700 (PDT), True North
<princecraft49@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 10:04:30 UTC-3, Justan Ohlphart wrote:that
True North <prince...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r"eminently credible." > >>>>> > >>>>> The former acting White House
On Saturday, 2 July 2022 at 09:44:35 UTC-3, Keyser Söze wrote:> On
7/2/22 7:39 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: > > On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On >>>> Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com"
<wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> >From an op-ed article >>>>>>>> by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: > >>>>> > >>>>> It's quite likely that Trump
attempted to obstruct justice, which > >>>>> may turn out to be >>>>>>>> the most serious, and most provable crime he > >>>>> committed >>>>>>>> according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of > >>>>>
Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most > >>>>>>>> >>>>> worried about. > >>>>> > >>>>> He also described a former >>>>>>>>>>>>> White House aide's Tuesday testimony as > >>>>>
chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on > >>>>> Wednesday that in his view
the real threat to former President > >>>>> Donald Trump was evidence
that might lead to accusations of > >>>>> obstruction of justice. >
credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And >Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president > >>>>>
against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty > >>>>>
maintaining that position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's >
testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." > >>>>> >
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that
hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark
for the former > >>>>> president," Mulvaney wrote. >
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's
hearing revealed one > >>>>> real threat to
Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words
or > >>>>>
wasn't running in 2024, this > >>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. Deit is the one that should most worry the former president." >
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming >
toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that >
January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving
their > >>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team > >>>>> player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a > >>>>> reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mulvaney said that
the implication behind displaying the messages > >>>>> during
the hearing was "crystal clear." > >>>>> > >>>>> "The Jan. 6
committee members believe they have evidence that > >>>>> people
within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate > >>>>>
witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is
obstruction of justice." > >>>> What do you want to bet,
if Trump said he
Santis may be taking that option away > >>>> from him anyway. > >>> >
=== > >>> > >>> witch-hunt > >>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ > >>> nounhistorical >>>>> > >>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; >>>>>>>>> plural > >>> noun: witchhunts > >>> > >>> a) search for and
subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. > >>> b) informal: a >>>>>>>>> campaign directed against a person or group > >>> holding
unorthodox or unpopular views. > >>> > >>> I take some exception >>>>>>>>> to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its > >>> implication of a >>>>>>>>> search for something that isn't real. In my mind, > >>> and the >>>>>>>>> mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The > >>> >>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm >>>>>>>>> not > >>> sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 >>>>>>>>> but that's a > >>> good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique >>>>>>>>> with the right win > >>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so
we never > >>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. > >>> > >> >
defense. > >> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece ofThe whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is > >>>> >> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one > >>>>>> >> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>> > >> amendment) > >> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? > >>>>>>>>>>> >> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? > >> I would much
prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping >>>>>>>>>>>>> away at > >> his base. > >> I still believe the risks of >>>>>>>>>>>>> trying to charge this guy over bullshit > >> and the social >>>>>>>>>>>>> upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. > >> I >>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in > >> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>> with few resources to > >> present a
shit who has > >> always been surrounded by lawyers. > > > > Even Biden
the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. > > It's all "Russia,
Russia, Russia". > > > > > >> I'd love to see Trump convicted of this
one: > > 18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection > > Whoever
incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or >
insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws >
thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this >
title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and *shall be >
incapable of holding any office under the United States.* > > (June 25,
1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103?322, title XXXIII, >
§?330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)> -- > * I just want to
find 11,780 votes... *I wonder if "gives aid or comfort thereto" could
apply to the hoard of repugnants who still make excuses for Trumps crimes? >>>
Do you lie awake at night dreaming up new ways to suck Fat Harry's
arse?
--
lets go Brandon...
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
SNERK!
Knew I was referring to all y'all?
Were you unable to read the question?
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com>waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), > >>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> >
Wrote in message:r
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> > wrote:> >On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: > >> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), > >> "
of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. > >>>>> > >>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about. > >>>>> > >>>>> He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminentlyFrom an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: > >>>>> > >>>>> It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director
Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." > >>>>> > >>>>> "Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote. > >>>>> > >Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president." > >>>>> > >>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messagesMulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
unpopular views. > >>> > >>> I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best tonoun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts > >>> > >>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. > >>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or
The court would still be hearing motions by then. > >> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in > >> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to > >> present a defense. > >> Trump may be a piece of shitbut he is a rich piece of shit who has > >> always been surrounded by lawyers. > >> > > > >Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. > >It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia
YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING.
--
lets go Brandon...
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly after
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>>> from him anyway.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best to
edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>>>> from him anyway.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with
our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme
Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
On 7/3/2022 8:57 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden
has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our
alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to
get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
Sorry Harry. It's hard if not impossible to believe any of this
if considered without any bias pro or con about Trump's
personality flaws.
Biden is a joke globally, much as he is domestically, on all accounts.
On 7/3/22 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:57 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:You've been paying too much attention to the Trumpsters, and the morons
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden
has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our
alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to
get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
Sorry Harry. It's hard if not impossible to believe any of this
if considered without any bias pro or con about Trump's
personality flaws.
Biden is a joke globally, much as he is domestically, on all accounts.
like Justin, Herring, Bill, et cetera. Except for his fellow despots,
Trump is the laughing stock of the free world, considered an
intellectual cipher, and a criminal.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 08:57:55 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has
worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with
our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme
Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
Frontline (PBS) has a 2 part series about the "great divide" in the
country and they start with Obama. The Obama years really drove in the
wedge and Trump just fueled a fire that was already raging.
You folks seem to want to ignore the overall dissatisfaction out there
in Flyover land and want to believe if you can kill off Trump,
everyone will be happy again.
That is far from reality.
Trump is a symptom, not the root cause.
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has >worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with
our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme
Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
On 7/3/22 1:28 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 08:57:55 -0400, Keyser Sze> <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:> >> On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:>>>>>>>>> But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for>>> a moment,do you really feel the USA is in better positions>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally>>> today compared to four years ago?.>>>> Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has>> worked to relieve that, and
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> > But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally> today compared to four yearsago?.Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >> >>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >> >>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
On 7/3/22 1:28 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 08:57:55 -0400, Keyser Sze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has
worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with >>> our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme
Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
Frontline (PBS) has a 2 part series about the "great divide" in the
country and they start with Obama. The Obama years really drove in the
wedge and Trump just fueled a fire that was already raging.
You folks seem to want to ignore the overall dissatisfaction out there
in Flyover land and want to believe if you can kill off Trump,
everyone will be happy again.
That is far from reality.
Trump is a symptom, not the root cause.
Trump is the accelerant. Palin was the match.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, >>>>>>>>>> which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable >>>>>>>>>> crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of
Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony >>>>>>>>>> as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote >>>>>>>>>> on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former
President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to
accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former
president against claims that he did "anything illegal or
criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly after
Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that >>>>>>>>>> hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the >>>>>>>>>> former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one >>>>>>>>>> real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or >>>>>>>>>> credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. >>>>>>>>>> "And it is the one that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of >>>>>>>>>> Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages >>>>>>>>>> that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving >>>>>>>>>> their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a >>>>>>>>>> "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as >>>>>>>>>> well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the
messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that >>>>>>>>>> people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate
witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt;
plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding >>>>>>>> unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its >>>>>>>> implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, >>>>>>>> and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm >>>>>>>> not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but >>>>>>>> that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the >>>>>>>> right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>> that we never have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the
Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat
during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be
said for the global supply chain crisis. Could Trump have done anything
about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a
good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an
election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? That is the
bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us of how fragile it can be.
The vast majority of the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and
bullshit in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we can thank
the feckless Republican party who stood by their flawed candidate while
the ship was burning.
More bullshit, eh Wayne? If it's well known that the Quantitative
Easing Program planted the seeds of inflation, why the fuck did your
boy keep spending trillions?
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),Staff.
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >> >> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >> >> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >> >>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >> >> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >> >>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >> >>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >> >>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >> >>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >> >>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >> >>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct the peacefulCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could Trump
More bullshit, eh Wayne? If it's well known that the Quantitative
Easing Program planted the seeds of inflation, why the fuck did your
boy keep spending trillions?
On 7/3/22 1:28 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 08:57:55 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has
worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with >>> our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme
Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
Frontline (PBS) has a 2 part series about the "great divide" in the
country and they start with Obama. The Obama years really drove in the
wedge and Trump just fueled a fire that was already raging.
You folks seem to want to ignore the overall dissatisfaction out there
in Flyover land and want to believe if you can kill off Trump,
everyone will be happy again.
That is far from reality.
Trump is a symptom, not the root cause.
Trump is the accelerant. Palin was the match.
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >> >>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >> >>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
On 7/3/22 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:57 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:You've been paying too much attention to the Trumpsters, and the morons
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden
has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our
alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades
to get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag. >>>
Sorry Harry. It's hard if not impossible to believe any of this
if considered without any bias pro or con about Trump's
personality flaws.
Biden is a joke globally, much as he is domestically, on all accounts.
like Justin, Herring, Bill, et cetera. Except for his fellow despots,
Trump is the laughing stock of the free world, considered an
intellectual cipher, and a criminal.
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:rago?.Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> > But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally> today compared to four years
Bydone has done zilch to unifu the country. He's alienated just
about everyone but AOC. He's afraid of that bartender.
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this >>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>>>>> from him anyway.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 11:37:53 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/3/22 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:57 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:You've been paying too much attention to the Trumpsters, and the morons
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden
has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our
alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to >>>> get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.
Sorry Harry. It's hard if not impossible to believe any of this
if considered without any bias pro or con about Trump's
personality flaws.
Biden is a joke globally, much as he is domestically, on all accounts.
like Justin, Herring, Bill, et cetera. Except for his fellow despots,
Trump is the laughing stock of the free world, considered an
intellectual cipher, and a criminal.
Biden is a drooling old man who is stumbling through his presidency,
watching the world burning and having no ideas of what to do.
We have stagflation unseen since the Carter years, The country is
divided and as close civil war as we have been in 165 years. We have
the first major war in Europe since 1945. The rich keep getting richer
and the middle class is getting poorer.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away >>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Staff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting WhiteIt's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
said he wasn't running in 2024, this>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away>>>>>>>> from him anyway.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ===>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunt>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/>>>>>>> nounhistorical>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt;"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice.">>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump
to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxicI take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best
shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has>>>>>> always been surroThe court would still be hearing motions by then.>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to>>>>>> present a defense.>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of
"Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com> Wrote in message:r2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg>>
On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,
July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, >> waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22
PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400,
"Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>> >> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On
Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >From an op-ed article by
Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's quite likely that
Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most
serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick
Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House
Chief of Staff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the
threat Trump should be most worried about.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He also
described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently
credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of
staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat
to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to
accusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote
that he had previously defended the former president against claims that
he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot.
He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Because after some of the
bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney
wrote.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's
hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on
Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at
me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
president.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by
Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of
two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before
giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a
"team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a
reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during
the hearing was "crystal clear.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Jan. 6 committee
members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump
operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that,
any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice.">>>>>>>> What do you
want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this>>>>>>>> whole
witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away>>>>>>>>
from him anyway.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ===>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunt>>>>>>>
/?wiCH ?h?nt/>>>>>>> nounhistorical>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural
noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:
witchhunts>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a
supposed witch.>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person
or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I take
some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of
a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to
prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just
keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see
his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party
totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxic influence >> again.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The whole process bothers me. Even you admit,
the whole exercise is>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again
(two impeachments, one>>>>>> after he left office and now you are
hanging your hat on the 14th>>>>>> amendment)>>>>>> Isn't this supposed
to be up to the voters?>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >> elections?>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is
already chipping away at>>>>>> his base.>>>>>> I still believe the risks
of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>> and the social upheaval
it might cause is not worth the risk for the>>>>>> slim chance you can
get any kind of conviction by 2024.>>>>>> The court would still be
hearing motions by then.>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in
court for a school shooting in>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against
a kid with few resources to>>>>>> present a defense.>>>>>> Trump may be
a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has>>>>>> always been
surrounded by lawyers.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming
Trump for much anymore.>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".>>>>
Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia
watch>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.>>>>>> ===>>>>>> Putin hadpretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's
Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.>>>>>> >> https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Cute.>>>> It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is>>
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your>> dislike goes
back a long ways ... back when he was in>> private business and well
before he ran for and won the>> Presidency.>>>> But, if you can put that
intense dislike and bias aside for>> a moment, do you really feel the
USA is in better positions>> and conditions, economically, domestically
and globally>> today compared to four years ago?.>> -- > > ===> > The
seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative
Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid
crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the
global supply chain crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if
still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it
not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct
the peaceful transfer of power? That is the bedrock of our democracy,
and Trump reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in the 2020
election and rightfully voted him out of office. For better or worse
Biden was the only choice. For that we can thank the feckless
Republican party who stood by their flawed candidate while the ship was
burning.I guess where we differ is in the Trump's alleged attempt to
overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. I
really don'tthink that the events of Jan 6th was as serious or
threatening to thethe country as the media and the Jan 6 commission is
trying to make itout to be. I also distinctly recall Trump calling for a
"peaceful"demonstration .... not a riot or attempt to take over the
government.He's not the first by any means. His style is unique for
sure andmay be inappropriate but I seem to remember a guy named Gore
contestingan election for months and, more recently, a woman named
Hillary who,to this day, still contends that the 2016 election was
"stolen" fromher.-- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.https://www.avg.com
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:> "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com> Wrote in message:r>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,>> July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,>>waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22>> PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400,>> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM,>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On
Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to>> accusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote>> that he had previously defended the former president against claims that>> he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to theHe also>> described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently>> credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of>> staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat>> to former President
still be>> hearing motions by then.>>>>>> I mentioned before, Chis base.>>>>>> I still believe the risks>> of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>> and the social upheaval>> it might cause is not worth the risk for the>>>>>> slim chance you can>> get any kind of conviction by 2024.>>>>>> The court would
Keyser Soze <keysersoze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg>>>>
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:> "Mr. Luddite"
<nothere@noland.com> Wrote in message:r>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM,
waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,>> July 3, 2022 at
7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,>>
waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at
4:16:22>> PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022
07:39:53 -0400,>> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On
7/1/2022 4:58 PM,>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022
11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com"
<wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On>> Friday, July 1, 2022 at
2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022
09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com">>
<wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >From an op-ed article
that>> Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be theMick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's quite likely
most>> serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick>>
Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House>>
Chief of Staff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the>>
threat Trump should be most worried about.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He also>>
described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently>>
credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of>>
staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real
threat>> to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead
wrote>> that he had previously defended the former president againstaccusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney
claims that>> he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot.>> He said he was having difficulty maintaining that
position, however,>> particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he
said he found>> "eminently credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Because after
some of the>> bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is
that things>> could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney>>
wrote.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's>>
hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on>>
Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at>>
me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former>>
president.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by>>
Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of>>
two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before>>
giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a>>
"team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a>>
reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages
during>> the hearing was "crystal clear.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Jan. 6
committee>> members believe they have evidence that people within the
Trump>> operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that,>> any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice.">>>>>>>>
What do you>> want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024,
this>>>>>>>> whole>> witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that
option away>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ===>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/>>>>>>> nounhistorical>>>>>>> noun:
witch-hunt; plural>> noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:>>
witchhunts>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a>>
supposed witch.>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a
person>> or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
take>> some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of>> a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and
the mind of many>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The
question is how best to>> prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not
sure it's enough to just>> keep him from running in 2024 but that's a
good start. I'd like to see>> his cult mystique with the right win
sector of the Republican party>> totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence>> again.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
whole process bothers me. Even you admit,>> the whole exercise is>>>>>>
designed to prevent him from running again>> (two impeachments,
14th>>>>>> amendment)>>>>>> Isn't this supposed>> to be up to theafter he left office and now you are>> hanging your hat on the
voters?>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free>>
elections?>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in>>
the primaries by>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is>>
already chipping away at>>>>>> his base.>>>>>> I still believe the
risks>> of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>> and the social
upheaval>> it might cause is not worth the risk for the>>>>>> slim
chance you can>> get any kind of conviction by 2024.>>>>>> The court
would still be>> hearing motions by then.>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz
is still in>> court for a school shooting in>>>>>> 2018 and it was a
slam dunk against>> a kid with few resources to>>>>>> present a
defense.>>>>>> Trump may be>> a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has>>>>>> always been>> surrounded by lawyers.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming>> Trump for much anymore.>>>>> It's
all "Russia, Russia, Russia".>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or
someone will point out Russia>> was>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch.
They got frisky during Obama's>> watch>>>> and started a war on Biden's
watch.>>>>>> ===>>>>>> Putin had>> Trump right where he wanted him and
didn't want to upset the balance.>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
As Donnie says: I agree completely with this post.Cute.>>>> It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which
dislike goes>> back a long ways ... back when he was in>> privateunderstandable. Based on your many posts about him, your>>
business and well>> before he ran for and won the>> Presidency.>>>> But,
if you can put that>> intense dislike and bias aside for>> a moment, do
you really feel the>> USA is in better positions>> and conditions,
economically, domestically>> and globally>> today compared to four years
ago?.>> -- > > ===> > The>> seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's
watch with the Quantitative>> Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid>> crisis but now were paying the price.
The same can be said for the>> global supply chain crisis. Could Trump
have done anything about it if>> still in office? Frankly I doubt it.
He would have done a good job of>> blaming it on someone else however.
That's his special talent. Does it>> not matter to you that he tried to
overthrow an election and obstruct>> the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy,>> and Trump reminds us of how
fragile it can be. The vast majority of the>> electorate saw through
his bluff, bluster and bullshit in the 2020>> election and rightfully
voted him out of office. For better or worse>> Biden was the only
choice. For that we can thank the feckless>> Republican party who stood
by their flawed candidate while the ship was>> burning.I guess where we
differ is in the Trump's alleged attempt to>> overthrow an election and
obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. I>> really don'tthink that the
events of Jan 6th was as serious or>> threatening to thethe country as
the media and the Jan 6 commission is>> trying to make itout to be. I
also distinctly recall Trump calling for a>> "peaceful"demonstration
.... not a riot or attempt to take over the>> government.He's not the
first by any means. His style is unique for>> sure andmay be
inappropriate but I seem to remember a guy named Gore>> contestingan
election for months and, more recently, a woman named>> Hillary who,to
this day, still contends that the 2016 election was>> "stolen"
fromher.-- This email has been checked for viruses by
AVG.https://www.avg.com> > To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He
seems obliviius to the> civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the
ship of state is> rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and
we're doing all> we can. My question is what are they trying to do to
our country,> and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme
court no> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer
jail> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that>
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.>
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.> > Im going to
celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming> down tomorrow
until the next event worth celebrating.If you, herring, and bilious bill
had any talent, you could revive theNairobi Trio and appear to be more
clever than any of you are. https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U-- Lock Trump Up
Clever is not the guy in Maryland who suffered two bankruptcies,
countless loan and tax defaults, hasn't held down an honest job
since his Clown college days, abandoned his family, lies about
everything in order to impress Donnie. Keeps a shotgun behind his
front door because he's afraid of the boogy man. Claims to be
married but can't verify it. Says he lost a couple a hundred
pounds but cant verify it. Says he's owned yachts but cant verify
it. Doesn't own any property on record. In other words, a
complete loser.
Justan Ohlphart <m...@yourservice.com> wrote:2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg>>>>
Keyser Soze <keyse...@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
Justan Ohlphart <m...@yourservice.com> wrote:> "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> Wrote in message:r>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM,
waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,>> July 3, 2022 at
7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,>>
waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at
4:16:22>> PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022
07:39:53 -0400,>> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On
7/1/2022 4:58 PM,>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022
11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com"
<wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On>> Friday, July 1, 2022 at >> 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022
09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com">>
<wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >From an op-ed article
that>> Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the >> most>> serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick>> >> Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House>> >> Chief of Staff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the>>Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's quite likely
threat Trump should be most worried about.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He also>>
described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently>> >> credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of>>
staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real
threat>> to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead
wrote>> that he had previously defended the former president againstaccusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney
claims that>> he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot.>> He said he was having difficulty maintaining that
position, however,>> particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >> said he found>> "eminently credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Because after
some of the>> bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is
that things>> could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney>> >> wrote.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's>>
hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on>>
Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at>>
me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former>>
president.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He referred to the evidence presented by>> >> Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of>> >> two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before>> >> giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to being a>>
"team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a>> >> reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages
during>> the hearing was "crystal clear.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Jan. 6 >> committee>> members believe they have evidence that people within the
Trump>> operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that,>> any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice.">>>>>>>>
What do you>> want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024,
this>>>>>>>> whole>> witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that >> option away>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ===>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/>>>>>>> nounhistorical>>>>>>> noun:
witch-hunt; plural>> noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:>> >> witchhunts>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a>> >> supposed witch.>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a
person>> or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I >> take>> some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of>> a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and >> the mind of many>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The
question is how best to>> prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not
sure it's enough to just>> keep him from running in 2024 but that's a
good start. I'd like to see>> his cult mystique with the right win
sector of the Republican party>> totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence>> again.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
whole process bothers me. Even you admit,>> the whole exercise is>>>>>> >> designed to prevent him from running again>> (two impeachments,
voters?>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free>>after he left office and now you are>> hanging your hat on the >> 14th>>>>>> amendment)>>>>>> Isn't this supposed>> to be up to the
elections?>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in>> >> the primaries by>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is>>
already chipping away at>>>>>> his base.>>>>>> I still believe the
risks>> of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>> and the social >> upheaval>> it might cause is not worth the risk for the>>>>>> slim
chance you can>> get any kind of conviction by 2024.>>>>>> The court
would still be>> hearing motions by then.>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz >> is still in>> court for a school shooting in>>>>>> 2018 and it was a
slam dunk against>> a kid with few resources to>>>>>> present a
defense.>>>>>> Trump may be>> a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >> shit who has>>>>>> always been>> surrounded by lawyers.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming>> Trump for much anymore.>>>>> It's
all "Russia, Russia, Russia".>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or >> someone will point out Russia>> was>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch.
They got frisky during Obama's>> watch>>>> and started a war on Biden's >> watch.>>>>>> ===>>>>>> Putin had>> Trump right where he wanted him and
didn't want to upset the balance.>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Cute.>>>> It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which
dislike goes>> back a long ways ... back when he was in>> privateunderstandable. Based on your many posts about him, your>>
business and well>> before he ran for and won the>> Presidency.>>>> But, >> if you can put that>> intense dislike and bias aside for>> a moment, do >> you really feel the>> USA is in better positions>> and conditions,
economically, domestically>> and globally>> today compared to four years >> ago?.>> -- > > ===> > The>> seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's
watch with the Quantitative>> Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid>> crisis but now were paying the price. >> The same can be said for the>> global supply chain crisis. Could Trump
have done anything about it if>> still in office? Frankly I doubt it.
He would have done a good job of>> blaming it on someone else however.
That's his special talent. Does it>> not matter to you that he tried to >> overthrow an election and obstruct>> the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy,>> and Trump reminds us of how
fragile it can be. The vast majority of the>> electorate saw through
his bluff, bluster and bullshit in the 2020>> election and rightfully
voted him out of office. For better or worse>> Biden was the only
choice. For that we can thank the feckless>> Republican party who stood >> by their flawed candidate while the ship was>> burning.I guess where we >> differ is in the Trump's alleged attempt to>> overthrow an election and >> obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. I>> really don'tthink that the >> events of Jan 6th was as serious or>> threatening to thethe country as
the media and the Jan 6 commission is>> trying to make itout to be. I
also distinctly recall Trump calling for a>> "peaceful"demonstration
.... not a riot or attempt to take over the>> government.He's not the
first by any means. His style is unique for>> sure andmay be
inappropriate but I seem to remember a guy named Gore>> contestingan
election for months and, more recently, a woman named>> Hillary who,to
this day, still contends that the 2016 election was>> "stolen"
fromher.-- This email has been checked for viruses by
AVG.https://www.avg.com> > To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He
seems obliviius to the> civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the >> ship of state is> rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and
we're doing all> we can. My question is what are they trying to do to
our country,> and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme
court no> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer
jail> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that> >> we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.>
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.> > Im going to
celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming> down tomorrow
until the next event worth celebrating.If you, herring, and bilious bill >> had any talent, you could revive theNairobi Trio and appear to be more
clever than any of you are. https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U-- Lock Trump Up
Clever is not the guy in Maryland who suffered two bankruptcies,As Donnie says: I agree completely with this post.
countless loan and tax defaults, hasn't held down an honest job
since his Clown college days, abandoned his family, lies about
everything in order to impress Donnie. Keeps a shotgun behind his
front door because he's afraid of the boogy man. Claims to be
married but can't verify it. Says he lost a couple a hundred
pounds but cant verify it. Says he's owned yachts but cant verify
it. Doesn't own any property on record. In other words, a
complete loser.
Keyser Soze <keyse...@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:rwaynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22>> PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400,>> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM,>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On
Justan Ohlphart <m...@yourservice.com> wrote:> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> Wrote in message:r>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,>> July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,>>
Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to>> accusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote>> that he had previously defended the former president against claims that>> he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to theHe also>> described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently>> credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of>> staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat>> to former President
still be>> hearing motions by then.>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in>> court for a school shooting in>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against>> a kid with few resources to>>>>>> present a defense.>>>>>> Trump may be>> a piece of shit but hehis base.>>>>>> I still believe the risks>> of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>> and the social upheaval>> it might cause is not worth the risk for the>>>>>> slim chance you can>> get any kind of conviction by 2024.>>>>>> The court would
Clever is not the guy in Maryland who suffered two bankruptcies,
countless loan and tax defaults, hasn't held down an honest job
since his Clown college days, abandoned his family, lies about
everything in order to impress Donnie. Keeps a shotgun behind his
front door because he's afraid of the boogy man. Claims to be
married but can't verify it. Says he lost a couple a hundred
pounds but cant verify it. Says he's owned yachts but cant verify
it. Doesn't own any property on record. In other words, a
complete loser.
--
lets go Brandon...
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
On Monday, 4 July 2022 at 12:23:09 UTC-3, Justan Ohlphart wrote:> Keyser Soze <keyse...@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r > > Justan Ohlphart <m...@yourservice.com> wrote:> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> Wrote in message:r>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM,waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,>> July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,>> waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22>> PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022
of Staff.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Per Mulvaney, such claims are the>> threat Trump should be most worried about.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He also>> described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently>> credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former actingIt's quite likely that>> Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most>> serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick>> Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House>> Chief
(two impeachments, one>>>>>> after he left office and now you are>> hanging your hat on the 14th>>>>>> amendment)>>>>>> Isn't this supposed>> to be up to the voters?>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free>> elections?>>>>>> I would muchprefer that he simply gets clobbered in>> the primaries by>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is>> already chipping away at>>>>>> his base.>>>>>> I still believe the risks>> of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>> and the social
On Monday, 4 July 2022 at 12:37:33 UTC-3, Bill wrote:> Justan Ohlphart <m...@yourservice.com> wrote: > > Keyser Soze <keyse...@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r > >> Justan Ohlphart <m...@yourservice.com> wrote:> "Mr. Luddite" > >> <not...@noland.com>Wrote in message:r>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, > >> waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:> On Sunday,>> July 3, 2022 at > >> 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,>> > >> waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at > >> 4:16:
waynebatr...@hotmail.com" > >> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On>> Friday, July 1, 2022 at > >> 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 > >> 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com">> > >> <wayne.PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 > >> 07:39:53 -0400,>> "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>> wrote:>>>>> On > >> 7/1/2022 4:58 PM,>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 > >> 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>> "
former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead > >> to>> accusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney > >> wrote>> that he had previously defended the former president against > >> claims that>> he did "anything illegalHe also>> > >> described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently>> > >> credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of>> > >> staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real > >> threat>> to
real. In my mind, and > >> the mind of many>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The > >> question is how best to>> prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not > >> sure it's enough to just>> keep him from running in 2024 but that's a > >> goodwitch-hunt>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/>>>>>>> nounhistorical>>>>>>> noun: > >> witch-hunt; plural>> noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:>> > >> witchhunts>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a) search for and subsequent persecution of a>> > >> supposed witch.>b) informal: a campaign directed against a > >> person>> or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >> take>> some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its > >> implication of>> a search for something that isn't
voters?>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:Staff.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
On 7/3/2022 2:32 PM, Justan Ohlphart wrote:ago?.Trump has ramped up the amount of hatred in this country, but Biden has worked to relieve that, and he certainly has improved our alliances with our allies. It is going to take years if not decades to get the Supreme Court back to the middle. The economy is a mixed bag.-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/3/22 7:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> > But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally> today compared to four years
Bydone has done zilch to unifu the country. He's alienated just
about everyone but AOC. He's afraid of that bartender.
Even AOC has Biden on her shit list for "doing nothing" about
recent Supreme Court decisions. She wants to either impeach
them or do away with the SCOTUS completely.
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the >Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are. >https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the
Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are.
https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:Staff.
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
I guess where we differ is in the Trump's alleged attempt to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. I really don't think that the events of Jan 6th was as serious or threatening to the
the country as the media and the Jan 6 commission is trying to make it
out to be. I also distinctly recall Trump calling for a "peaceful" demonstration .... not a riot or attempt to take over the government.
He's not the first by any means. His style is unique for sure and
may be inappropriate but I seem to remember a guy named Gore contesting
an election for months and, more recently, a woman named Hillary who,
to this day, still contends that the 2016 election was "stolen" from
her.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 6:53:06 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:Staff.
On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
I guess where we differ is in the Trump's alleged attempt to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. I really don't
think that the events of Jan 6th was as serious or threatening to the
the country as the media and the Jan 6 commission is trying to make it
out to be. I also distinctly recall Trump calling for a "peaceful"
demonstration .... not a riot or attempt to take over the government.
He's not the first by any means. His style is unique for sure and
may be inappropriate but I seem to remember a guy named Gore contesting
an election for months and, more recently, a woman named Hillary who,
to this day, still contends that the 2016 election was "stolen" from
her.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
She also tried to get electors to switch their votes and 7 actually did switch from Trump in 2016. It's OK for democrats to try but not republicans.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>Staff.
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
former president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:Staff.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
former president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 07:13:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>Staff.
wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election andCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
If that is your standard, Nixon was one of the most honest politicians
ever. ;-)
John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the
Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are.
https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
I guess a lack of talent allows us to be still be married to our first
wife, not ever declaring bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent, Harry. Yours seems to be to live of others work.
On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 6:53:06 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:Staff.
On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however, particularly
president.""Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the former
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions to
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by >>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit >>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the >>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
I guess where we differ is in the Trump's alleged attempt to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. I really don't
think that the events of Jan 6th was as serious or threatening to the
the country as the media and the Jan 6 commission is trying to make it
out to be. I also distinctly recall Trump calling for a "peaceful"
demonstration .... not a riot or attempt to take over the government.
He's not the first by any means. His style is unique for sure and
may be inappropriate but I seem to remember a guy named Gore contesting
an election for months and, more recently, a woman named Hillary who,
to this day, still contends that the 2016 election was "stolen" from
her.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
She also tried to get electors to switch their votes and 7 actually did switch from Trump in 2016. It's OK for democrats to try but not republicans.
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com
wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in >>>>>>>>>>>> 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, >>>>>>>>>>>>> which may turn out to be the most serious, and most
provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White >>>>>>>>>>>>> House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be >>>>>>>>>>>>> most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday >>>>>>>>>>>>> testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to >>>>>>>>>>>>> former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead >>>>>>>>>>>>> to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former >>>>>>>>>>>>> president against claims that he did "anything illegal or >>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was >>>>>>>>>>>>> having difficulty maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in >>>>>>>>>>>>> that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed >>>>>>>>>>>>> one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's >>>>>>>>>>>>> words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at >>>>>>>>>>>>> me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry >>>>>>>>>>>>> the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of >>>>>>>>>>>>> Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two >>>>>>>>>>>>> messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received >>>>>>>>>>>>> before giving their depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good >>>>>>>>>>>>> graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the >>>>>>>>>>>>> messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence >>>>>>>>>>>>> that people within the Trump operation attempted to
intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way >>>>>>>>>>>>> you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that >>>>>>>>>>>> option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; >>>>>>>>>>> plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group >>>>>>>>>>> holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of >>>>>>>>>>> its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In >>>>>>>>>>> my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is >>>>>>>>>>> very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best >>>>>>>>>>> to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from >>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican >>>>>>>>>>> party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with >>>>>>>>>>> his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the
primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping >>>>>>>>>> away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over >>>>>>>>>> bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk >>>>>>>>>> for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit >>>>>>>>>> who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
Russia was
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to
upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the
Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat
during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same
can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could Trump have
done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He >>>>> would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however.
That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>> to overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of
power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the electorate saw
through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in the 2020 election and
rightfully voted him out of office. For better or worse Biden was
the only choice. For that we can thank the feckless Republican
party who stood by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
On 7/5/22 7:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>>> wrote:>>>>> On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),>>>> "waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:
com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, >>>>>>>>>>>>> which may turn out to be the most serious,"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.
get very dark >>>>>>>>>>>>> for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed >>>>>>>>>>>>> one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's >>>>>>>>>>>>> words orparticularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in >>>>>>>>>>>>> that hearing, my guess is that things could
from him anyway.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ===>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunt>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; >>>>>>>>>>> plural noun: witchhunts>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>you slice it, is obstruction of justice.">>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in >>>>>>>>>>>> 2024, this>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that >>>>>>>>>>>> option away>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group >>>>>>>>>>> holding unorthodox or unpopular views.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of >>>>>>>>>>> its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In >>>>>>>>>>> my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is >>>>>>>>>>> very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best >>>>>>>>>>> to
On 7/5/22 3:23 AM, Richard Grew wrote:> On Monday, July 4, 2022 at 6:53:06 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>> On 7/3/2022 3:19 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>> On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>> On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:>>>>>>>>
Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to theHe also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible.">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President
would still be hearing motions by then.>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is stihis base.>>>>>>>> I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.>>>>>>>> The court
On 7/5/2022 11:02 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:Staff.
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 07:13:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election andCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
If that is your standard, Nixon was one of the most honest politicians
ever. ;-)
Well, he *was* honest about Checkers. :-)
On 7/5/22 7:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com >>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which may turn out to be the most serious, and most >>>>>>>>>>>>>> provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White >>>>>>>>>>>>>> House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday >>>>>>>>>>>>>> testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>> president against claims that he did "anything illegal or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> having difficulty maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed >>>>>>>>>>>>>> one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at >>>>>>>>>>>>>> me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two >>>>>>>>>>>>>> messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received >>>>>>>>>>>>>> before giving their depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>> graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that people within the Trump operation attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that >>>>>>>>>>>>> option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; >>>>>>>>>>>> plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group >>>>>>>>>>>> holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of >>>>>>>>>>>> its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In >>>>>>>>>>>> my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is >>>>>>>>>>>> very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how best >>>>>>>>>>>> to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from >>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican >>>>>>>>>>>> party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with >>>>>>>>>>>> his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the >>>>>>>>>>> primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping >>>>>>>>>>> away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over >>>>>>>>>>> bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk >>>>>>>>>>> for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit >>>>>>>>>>> who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
Russia was
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to
upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump was the most corrupt POTUS in our history, and his adult childrenCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the
Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat >>>>>> during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same
can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could Trump have >>>>>> done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He >>>>>> would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however.
That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>> to overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of
power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the electorate saw >>>>>> through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in the 2020 election and
rightfully voted him out of office. For better or worse Biden was >>>>>> the only choice. For that we can thank the feckless Republican
party who stood by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
are equally corrupt.
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:
John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the >>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are.
https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
I guess a lack of talent allows us to be still be married to our first
wife, not ever declaring bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent, >> Harry. Yours seems to be to live of others work.
You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't Herring previously married?
Justin carefully keeps all the details of his life a big secret, and for
good reason. How far can he travel wearing that ankle bracelet? And all
three of you are boringly repetitive. Yawn.
+
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 11:19:00 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>> Cute.
wrote:
On 7/5/2022 11:02 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 07:13:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn
out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according
to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White
House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as
"eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on
Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump
was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against
claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining
that position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he
said he found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my
guess is that things could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat
to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the
one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most
worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward
the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages
included allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of
interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within
the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:
witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group >>>>>>>>>>>>>> holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> its implication of a search for something that isn't real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how >>>>>>>>>>>>>> best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult
mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party >>>>>>>>>>>>>> totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxic influence
again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the
Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat >>>>>>>> during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same >>>>>>>> can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could Trump have >>>>>>>> done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. >>>>>>>> He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else
however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you >>>>>>>> that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful >>>>>>>> transfer of power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and
Trump reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in the >>>>>>>> 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. For better >>>>>>>> or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we can thank the >>>>>>>> feckless Republican party who stood by their flawed candidate
while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
If that is your standard, Nixon was one of the most honest politicians
ever. ;-)
Well, he *was* honest about Checkers. :-)
That was really the last time Nixon was accused of "personally gaining
... financially".
He may have been corrupt in gaining more power but it wasn't financial corruption benefitting his bottom line.
My problem with Nixon was how he expanded federal power, largely in an unconstitutional way.
I felt the same way about Reagan to some extent.
Carter promised to "streamline" government and all he did was add
additional bloat to existing agencies making them get bigger.
I really have a hard time liking any of them in my lifetime.
Eisenhower was the only one who actually reduced the size of
government but he set the stage for Vietnam and our flawed middle east policy.
Truman was the architect of the cold war and the condition in Korea we
are still suffering from.
JFK let his dick almost end life as we know it in Cuba by refusing the
deal we finally took but not before being one button press away from
nuclear war with Russia. We were only saved because Vasily Arkhipov, a
Soviet political officer on the Foxtrot (sub) B-59 would not let the
captain fire his nuke torpedo after they were depth charged.
Johnson lied us into Vietnam. The Bushes (and Clinton) lied us into
Iraq. Obama doubled down in Afghanistan and continued the Iraq war
after promising he would end both.
Trump's only redeeming quality was that he did not embrace either of
those stupid wars and chilled the Russians for 4 years. He still
ballooned the debt as much as Obama with printed money.
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:
John H <jher...@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the >>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are.
https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
I guess a lack of talent allows us to be still be married to our first wife, not ever declaring bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent, Harry. Yours seems to be to live of others work.
You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't Herring previously married?
Justin carefully keeps all the details of his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly repetitive. Yawn.
+
--
* I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
On Tuesday, 5 July 2022 at 15:55:40 UTC-3, Keyser Sze wrote:> On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote: > > John H <jher...@cox.net> wrote: > >> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze > >> <keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >>>> ToWayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the > >>>> civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is > >>>> rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all > >>>> we can. My question is what are they
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>> <keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest,crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:
John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the >>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are.
https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
I guess a lack of talent allows us to be still be married to our first
wife, not ever declaring bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent, >> Harry. Yours seems to be to live of others work.
You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, place, or show in a race in which >there were no other horses. And wasn't Herring previously married?
Justin carefully keeps all the details of his life a big secret, and for
good reason. How far can he travel wearing that ankle bracelet? And all
three of you are boringly repetitive. Yawn.
+
On Tuesday, 5 July 2022 at 15:55:40 UTC-3, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:
John H <jher...@cox.net> wrote:You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, place, or show in a race in which
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
To WayneTrump is the root of all evil. He seems obliviius to the
civil unrest, crime, graft, corruption, and the ship of state is
rudderless. All the can say is we're watching and we're doing all
we can. My question is what are they trying to do to our country,
and why? Constitution no good.Lets rewrite it. Supreme court no
good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. Nobody should suffer jail
time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. It doesn't matter that
we dont have infrostructure to support it. Borders dont matter.
Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe knows.
Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags are coming
down tomorrow until the next event worth celebrating.
If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you could revive the >> >>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any of you are.
https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
I guess a lack of talent allows us to be still be married to our first
wife, not ever declaring bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent, >> > Harry. Yours seems to be to live of others work.
there were no other horses. And wasn't Herring previously married?
Justin carefully keeps all the details of his life a big secret, and for
good reason. How far can he travel wearing that ankle bracelet? And all
three of you are boringly repetitive. Yawn.
+
--
* I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
I agree wholeheartedly and unequivocally with this post .
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 11:19:00 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>Staff.
wrote:
On 7/5/2022 11:02 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 07:13:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
If that is your standard, Nixon was one of the most honest politicians
ever. ;-)
Well, he *was* honest about Checkers. :-)
That was really the last time Nixon was accused of "personally gaining
... financially".
He may have been corrupt in gaining more power but it wasn't financial >corruption benefitting his bottom line.
My problem with Nixon was how he expanded federal power, largely in an >unconstitutional way.
I felt the same way about Reagan to some extent.
Carter promised to "streamline" government and all he did was add
additional bloat to existing agencies making them get bigger.
I really have a hard time liking any of them in my lifetime.
Eisenhower was the only one who actually reduced the size of
government but he set the stage for Vietnam and our flawed middle east >policy.
Truman was the architect of the cold war and the condition in Korea we
are still suffering from.
JFK let his dick almost end life as we know it in Cuba by refusing the
deal we finally took but not before being one button press away from
nuclear war with Russia. We were only saved because Vasily Arkhipov, a
Soviet political officer on the Foxtrot (sub) B-59 would not let the
captain fire his nuke torpedo after they were depth charged.
Johnson lied us into Vietnam. The Bushes (and Clinton) lied us into
Iraq. Obama doubled down in Afghanistan and continued the Iraq war
after promising he would end both.
Trump's only redeeming quality was that he did not embrace either of
those stupid wars and chilled the Russians for 4 years. He still
ballooned the debt as much as Obama with printed money.
On Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:59:36 -0400, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:of Staff.
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 11:19:00 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com> >>wrote:
On 7/5/2022 11:02 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 07:13:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <nothere@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com" <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>>>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
If that is your standard, Nixon was one of the most honest politicians >>>> ever. ;-)
Well, he *was* honest about Checkers. :-)
That was really the last time Nixon was accused of "personally gaining
... financially".
He may have been corrupt in gaining more power but it wasn't financial >>corruption benefitting his bottom line.
My problem with Nixon was how he expanded federal power, largely in an >>unconstitutional way.
I felt the same way about Reagan to some extent.
Carter promised to "streamline" government and all he did was add >>additional bloat to existing agencies making them get bigger.
I really have a hard time liking any of them in my lifetime.
Eisenhower was the only one who actually reduced the size of
government but he set the stage for Vietnam and our flawed middle east >>policy.
Truman was the architect of the cold war and the condition in Korea we
are still suffering from.
JFK let his dick almost end life as we know it in Cuba by refusing the
deal we finally took but not before being one button press away from >>nuclear war with Russia. We were only saved because Vasily Arkhipov, a >>Soviet political officer on the Foxtrot (sub) B-59 would not let the >>captain fire his nuke torpedo after they were depth charged.
Johnson lied us into Vietnam. The Bushes (and Clinton) lied us into
Iraq. Obama doubled down in Afghanistan and continued the Iraq war
after promising he would end both.
Trump's only redeeming quality was that he did not embrace either of
those stupid wars and chilled the Russians for 4 years. He still
ballooned the debt as much as Obama with printed money.
And you're a hero because you voted for none of them?
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Staff.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, notWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On
Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>>
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of
all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest, crime, graft,
corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is
we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are
they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets
rewrite it. Supreme court no>>>> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it.
Nobody should suffer jail>>>> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW.
It doesn't matter that>>>> we dont have infrostructure to support it.
Borders dont matter.>>>> Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe
knows.>>>>>>>> Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags
are coming>>>> down tomorrow until the next event worth
celebrating.>>>>>> If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you
could revive the>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any
of you are.>>> https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U>>>>>> "That's not a baby
kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!">>> > I guess a lack of talent
allows us to be still be married to our first> wife, not ever declaring
bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent,> Harry. Yours seems
to be to live of others work.> You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win,
place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't
Herring previously married? Justin carefully keeps all the details of
his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel
wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly
repetitive. Yawn.+-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
No ankle bracelet for me bub. I pay my taxes. Just in the past 5
years I've traveled in, not over, 47 states.
I wonder sometimes, why you keep returning to rec.boats. You must
revel in the scorn, bellittlement, mistrust, and general mayhem
we play on you and yours. You are pathetic. We have taken from
you everything you have unjustly bragged about.
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:Staff.
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included allusions
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was >>>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is >>>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in >>>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has >>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:Staff.
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >>>>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct the
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:Staff.
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:Staff.
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >> >>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief of
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and how
2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one >> >>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th >> >>>>>>>>> amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch >> >>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%
Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct theCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On
Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>>
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of
all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest, crime, graft,
corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is
we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are
they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets >>> rewrite it. Supreme court no>>>> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it.
Nobody should suffer jail>>>> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW.
It doesn't matter that>>>> we dont have infrostructure to support it.
Borders dont matter.>>>> Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe
knows.>>>>>>>> Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags
are coming>>>> down tomorrow until the next event worth
celebrating.>>>>>> If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you >>> could revive the>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any
of you are.>>> https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U>>>>>> "That's not a baby
kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!">>> > I guess a lack of talent
allows us to be still be married to our first> wife, not ever declaring
bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent,> Harry. Yours seems
to be to live of others work.> You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win,
place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't >>> Herring previously married? Justin carefully keeps all the details of
his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel
wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly
repetitive. Yawn.+-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
No ankle bracelet for me bub. I pay my taxes. Just in the past 5
years I've traveled in, not over, 47 states.
I wonder sometimes, why you keep returning to rec.boats. You must
revel in the scorn, bellittlement, mistrust, and general mayhem
we play on you and yours. You are pathetic. We have taken from
you everything you have unjustly bragged about.
A handful of you right-wing trashers remind me of how much stupidity and >ignorance there is in this world.
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:of Staff.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >>>>>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >>>>>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >>>>>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think. >>>
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or >>> have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:of Staff.
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry the
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >> >>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >> >>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to >> >>>>>>>>>>> present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >> >>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are >> >>>>> really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to >> >>>>> do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being >> >>>> the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >> >>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >> >>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >> >>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>of Staff.
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
the former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpgBiden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstructCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or >>> have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >business activities, especially when VP, this could become a reallyBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:08:57 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On
Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>>
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of >>>> all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest, crime, graft,
corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is >>>> we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are >>>> they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets >>>> rewrite it. Supreme court no>>>> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it.
Nobody should suffer jail>>>> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. >>>> It doesn't matter that>>>> we dont have infrostructure to support it.
Borders dont matter.>>>> Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe >>>> knows.>>>>>>>> Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags >>>> are coming>>>> down tomorrow until the next event worth
celebrating.>>>>>> If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you >>>> could revive the>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any >>>> of you are.>>> https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U>>>>>> "That's not a baby
kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!">>> > I guess a lack of talent >>>> allows us to be still be married to our first> wife, not ever declaring >>>> bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent,> Harry. Yours seems >>>> to be to live of others work.> You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win,
place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't >>>> Herring previously married? Justin carefully keeps all the details of
his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel
wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly
repetitive. Yawn.+-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
No ankle bracelet for me bub. I pay my taxes. Just in the past 5
years I've traveled in, not over, 47 states.
I wonder sometimes, why you keep returning to rec.boats. You must
revel in the scorn, bellittlement, mistrust, and general mayhem
we play on you and yours. You are pathetic. We have taken from
you everything you have unjustly bragged about.
A handful of you right-wing trashers remind me of how much stupidity and
ignorance there is in this world.
Stupidity and ignorance seems to drive the political process and the
view of politicians. Nobody wants to admit "their" politicians are
corrupt and it seems everyone in the opposition thinks the last or
current one from the other side is the "worst ever".
Compared to people like Grant, LBJ, Harding and even Reagan, Trump's corruption barely bumps the needle. At least he didn't cause the death
of millions, topple democratically elected governments and condone the smuggling of drugs to advance his ambitions. I think most of our
presidents have been involved in political corruption, bribery and intimidation. That even includes supposed "good" guys like JFK and
Truman.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may
turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed
according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and
Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried
about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as
"eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on
Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald
Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of
justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president
against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to
the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that
position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he
said he found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing,
my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real
threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility.
"It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that
should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming
toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6
panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The
messages included allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good
graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts
of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during
the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people
within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney
wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:
witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding
unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the
mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how
best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to
just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see
his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally
annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to >>>>>>>>>>>>> upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the >>>>>>>>>>> Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy >>>>>>>>>>> afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. >>>>>>>>>>> The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could >>>>>>>>>>> Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I >>>>>>>>>>> doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on >>>>>>>>>>> someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not >>>>>>>>>>> matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and >>>>>>>>>>> obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? That is the bedrock of >>>>>>>>>>> our democracy, and Trump reminds us of how fragile it can be. >>>>>>>>>>> The vast majority of the electorate saw through his bluff, >>>>>>>>>>> bluster and bullshit in the 2020 election and rightfully voted >>>>>>>>>>> him out of office. For better or worse Biden was the only >>>>>>>>>>> choice. For that we can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>> stood by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >>>>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >>>>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think. >>>>>
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or >>>>> have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging
his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the >>>> actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be
prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
==
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal as
VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's try
to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds are
current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential election.
The illegality continues as he solicits millions in donations under the
false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:08:57 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On >>>>> Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>>
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of >>>>> all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest, crime, graft,
corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is >>>>> we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are >>>>> they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets >>>>> rewrite it. Supreme court no>>>> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. >>>>> Nobody should suffer jail>>>> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. >>>>> It doesn't matter that>>>> we dont have infrostructure to support it. >>>>> Borders dont matter.>>>> Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe >>>>> knows.>>>>>>>> Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags >>>>> are coming>>>> down tomorrow until the next event worth
celebrating.>>>>>> If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you >>>>> could revive the>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any >>>>> of you are.>>> https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U>>>>>> "That's not a baby >>>>> kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!">>> > I guess a lack of talent >>>>> allows us to be still be married to our first> wife, not ever declaring >>>>> bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent,> Harry. Yours seems >>>>> to be to live of others work.> You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, >>>>> place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't >>>>> Herring previously married? Justin carefully keeps all the details of >>>>> his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel
wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly
repetitive. Yawn.+-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
No ankle bracelet for me bub. I pay my taxes. Just in the past 5
years I've traveled in, not over, 47 states.
I wonder sometimes, why you keep returning to rec.boats. You must
revel in the scorn, bellittlement, mistrust, and general mayhem
we play on you and yours. You are pathetic. We have taken from
you everything you have unjustly bragged about.
A handful of you right-wing trashers remind me of how much stupidity and >>> ignorance there is in this world.
Stupidity and ignorance seems to drive the political process and the
view of politicians. Nobody wants to admit "their" politicians are
corrupt and it seems everyone in the opposition thinks the last or
current one from the other side is the "worst ever".
Compared to people like Grant, LBJ, Harding and even Reagan, Trump's
corruption barely bumps the needle. At least he didn't cause the death
of millions, topple democratically elected governments and condone the
smuggling of drugs to advance his ambitions. I think most of our
presidents have been involved in political corruption, bribery and
intimidation. That even includes supposed "good" guys like JFK and
Truman.
Grant was a relative of our family, and I don’t think he was corrupt, just >extremely incompetent as POTUS.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Chief of Staff.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
the former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
and how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal withWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it,
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >> >>>>>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
That does not seem to matter in an impeachment. It is not a criminal prosecution, it is a political crusade.Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >> >>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >> >>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >> >>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >> >>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >> >>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >> >>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >> >>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >> >>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or >> >>> have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 22:05:43 -0000 (UTC), Bill <califbill9998remove8@gmail.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:08:57 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On >>>>>> Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>>
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of >>>>>> all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest, crime, graft, >>>>>> corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is >>>>>> we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are >>>>>> they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets >>>>>> rewrite it. Supreme court no>>>> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. >>>>>> Nobody should suffer jail>>>> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. >>>>>> It doesn't matter that>>>> we dont have infrostructure to support it. >>>>>> Borders dont matter.>>>> Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe >>>>>> knows.>>>>>>>> Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags >>>>>> are coming>>>> down tomorrow until the next event worth
celebrating.>>>>>> If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you >>>>>> could revive the>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any >>>>>> of you are.>>> https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U>>>>>> "That's not a baby >>>>>> kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!">>> > I guess a lack of talent >>>>>> allows us to be still be married to our first> wife, not ever declaring >>>>>> bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent,> Harry. Yours seems >>>>>> to be to live of others work.> You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, >>>>>> place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't >>>>>> Herring previously married? Justin carefully keeps all the details of >>>>>> his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel
wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly
repetitive. Yawn.+-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
No ankle bracelet for me bub. I pay my taxes. Just in the past 5
years I've traveled in, not over, 47 states.
I wonder sometimes, why you keep returning to rec.boats. You must
revel in the scorn, bellittlement, mistrust, and general mayhem
we play on you and yours. You are pathetic. We have taken from
you everything you have unjustly bragged about.
A handful of you right-wing trashers remind me of how much stupidity and >>>> ignorance there is in this world.
Stupidity and ignorance seems to drive the political process and the
view of politicians. Nobody wants to admit "their" politicians are
corrupt and it seems everyone in the opposition thinks the last or
current one from the other side is the "worst ever".
Compared to people like Grant, LBJ, Harding and even Reagan, Trump's
corruption barely bumps the needle. At least he didn't cause the death
of millions, topple democratically elected governments and condone the
smuggling of drugs to advance his ambitions. I think most of our
presidents have been involved in political corruption, bribery and
intimidation. That even includes supposed "good" guys like JFK and
Truman.
Grant was a relative of our family, and I don’t think he was corrupt, just >> extremely incompetent as POTUS.
As I said "Nobody wants to admit "their" politicians are
corrupt".
Grant was accused of illegally running confederate cotton up the
Mississippi during the war and his administration was the house
bribery built but I guess that is not corruption. ;-)
waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com <wayne.beardsley@gmail.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may
turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed
according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and
Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried
about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as
"eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on
Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald
Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of
justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president
against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to
the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that
position, however, particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he
said he found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing,
my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real
threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility.
"It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that
should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming
toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6
panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The
messages included allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good
graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts
of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during
the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people
within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney
wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun:
witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding
unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its
implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the
mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how
best to prove it, and how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to
just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see
his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally
annihilated so that we never have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power andCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the >>>>>>>>>>>> Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy >>>>>>>>>>>> afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. >>>>>>>>>>>> The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis. Could >>>>>>>>>>>> Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I >>>>>>>>>>>> doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on >>>>>>>>>>>> someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not >>>>>>>>>>>> matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and >>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? That is the bedrock of >>>>>>>>>>>> our democracy, and Trump reminds us of how fragile it can be. >>>>>>>>>>>> The vast majority of the electorate saw through his bluff, >>>>>>>>>>>> bluster and bullshit in the 2020 election and rightfully voted >>>>>>>>>>>> him out of office. For better or worse Biden was the only >>>>>>>>>>>> choice. For that we can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>>> stood by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >>>>>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >>>>>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>>>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or >>>>>> have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging >>>>> his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the >>>>> actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be
prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
==
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal as
VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's try
to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds are
current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country has
illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential election.
The illegality continues as he solicits millions in donations under the
false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
And Hillary getting at least 7 electors to change their votes is not >criminal?
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 22:05:43 -0000 (UTC), Bill
<califbill9998remove8@gmail.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:08:57 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
Justan Ohlphart <me@yourservice.com> wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> Wrote in message:r
On 7/4/22 6:44 PM, Bill wrote:> John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:>> On >>>>>>> Mon, 4 Jul 2022 14:58:04 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze>>
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:>>>>>>>> To WayneTrump is the root of >>>>>>> all evil. He seems obliviius to the>>>> civil unrest, crime, graft, >>>>>>> corruption, and the ship of state is>>>> rudderless. All the can say is >>>>>>> we're watching and we're doing all>>>> we can. My question is what are >>>>>>> they trying to do to our country,>>>> and why? Constitution no good.Lets
rewrite it. Supreme court no>>>> good. Lets pack it or get rid of it. >>>>>>> Nobody should suffer jail>>>> time. Go out and buy an electric car NOW. >>>>>>> It doesn't matter that>>>> we dont have infrostructure to support it. >>>>>>> Borders dont matter.>>>> Hunter Biden is the smartest person Sleepy Joe >>>>>>> knows.>>>>>>>> Im going to celebrate independence day anyway. My flags >>>>>>> are coming>>>> down tomorrow until the next event worth
celebrating.>>>>>> If you, herring, and bilious bill had any talent, you
could revive the>>> Nairobi Trio and appear to be more clever than any >>>>>>> of you are.>>> https://youtu.be/5-tFyBLo71U>>>>>> "That's not a baby >>>>>>> kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!">>> > I guess a lack of talent >>>>>>> allows us to be still be married to our first> wife, not ever declaring >>>>>>> bankruptcy, let alone twice. Talk about talent,> Harry. Yours seems >>>>>>> to be to live of others work.> You, Herring, and Justin couldn't win, >>>>>>> place, or show in a race in which there were no other horses. And wasn't
Herring previously married? Justin carefully keeps all the details of >>>>>>> his life a big secret, and for good reason. How far can he travel >>>>>>> wearing that ankle bracelet? And all three of you are boringly
repetitive. Yawn.+-- * I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
No ankle bracelet for me bub. I pay my taxes. Just in the past 5
years I've traveled in, not over, 47 states.
I wonder sometimes, why you keep returning to rec.boats. You must
revel in the scorn, bellittlement, mistrust, and general mayhem
we play on you and yours. You are pathetic. We have taken from
you everything you have unjustly bragged about.
A handful of you right-wing trashers remind me of how much stupidity and >>>>> ignorance there is in this world.
Stupidity and ignorance seems to drive the political process and the
view of politicians. Nobody wants to admit "their" politicians are
corrupt and it seems everyone in the opposition thinks the last or
current one from the other side is the "worst ever".
Compared to people like Grant, LBJ, Harding and even Reagan, Trump's
corruption barely bumps the needle. At least he didn't cause the death >>>> of millions, topple democratically elected governments and condone the >>>> smuggling of drugs to advance his ambitions. I think most of our
presidents have been involved in political corruption, bribery and
intimidation. That even includes supposed "good" guys like JFK and
Truman.
Grant was a relative of our family, and I don’t think he was corrupt, just
extremely incompetent as POTUS.
As I said "Nobody wants to admit "their" politicians are
corrupt".
Grant was accused of illegally running confederate cotton up the
Mississippi during the war and his administration was the house
bribery built but I guess that is not corruption. ;-)
I don’t think he knew what was going on around him as President.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:of Staff.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, and most provable crime he committed according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget; White House Chief
particularly after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found "eminently credible."
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the real threat to former President Donald Trump was evidence that might lead to accusations of obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the former president against claims that he did "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty maintaining that position, however,
the former president."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things could get very dark for the former president," Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one that should most worry
allusions to being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read transcripts of interviews.
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing consisting of two messages that January 6 panel witnesses said they received before giving their depositions. The messages included
how best to punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his cult mystique with the right win sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so that we never have to deal with hisWhat do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't running in 2024, this
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have evidence that people within the Trump operation attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" because of its implication of a search for something that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question is how best to prove it, and
2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>> Cute.Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point out Russia was
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Could Trump have done anything about it if still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow an election and obstruct
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain crisis.
the history of this country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, bankers and >>>>>>>>>> Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more we hear >>>>>>>>>> about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with a few >>>>>>>>>> small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in millions >>>>>>>>>> and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we have >>>>>>>> suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the corporate and >>>>>>>> government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for their >>>>>>>> decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same mentality >>>>>>>> in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with no real >>>>>>>> concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do next year >>>>>>>> or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos and Musk >>>>>>>> but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who has his >>>>>>> hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may think. >>>>>
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop revelations or >>>>> have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power andCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>> has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never have to deal with his toxic influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job >>>>>>>>>>>>> of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to
overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>> power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I
think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you
may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and
media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*)
broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired.
Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this
country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
On 7/7/2022 10:17 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious, and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that we never have to deal with his toxic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply >>>>>>>>>>>>>> chain crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>> special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The >>>>>>>>>>>>> more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people >>>>>>>>>>>>> are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud >>>>>>>>>>>>> with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden >>>>>>>>>>>> years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and >>>>>>>>>>> we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The
Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I
think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you >>>>>>>> may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and >>>>>>>> media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has
broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*)
broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything
illegal as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since
expired. Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump,
whose misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history
of this country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
You certainly have an imagination. Trump did no such thing.
But "the Big Guy" filled his bank accounts with his
drug addict son as VP and after.
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 11:19:32 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/22 10:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/7/2022 10:17 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious, and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that we never have to deal with his toxic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Yeah, Trump did. And Trump & Family have been filling their pocketsBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chain crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>> years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and >>>>>>>>>>>>> we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The >>>>>>>>>>>>> Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I >>>>>>>>>>> think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you >>>>>>>>>> may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and >>>>>>>>>> media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has
broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) >>>>>>>> broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything
illegal as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since
expired. Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>> whose misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history >>>>>> of this country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>> presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
You certainly have an imagination. Trump did no such thing.
But "the Big Guy" filled his bank accounts with his
drug addict son as VP and after.
illegally for years. Ever read up about the cancer charity scam?
It does make someone ponder how Biden could plop down $2.7 million
cash for his beach house after making $234k a year for 8 years at the
Naval Observatory. He claimed to be broke when he ran for VP (net
worth <$0). He did that right after he left the VP office.
On 7/7/22 10:52 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/2022 10:17 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious, and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Management and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hinge on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote. "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so that we never have to deal with his toxic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guy over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Yeah, Trump did. And Trump & Family have been filling their pocketsBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chain crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still in office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are. They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>> years as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and >>>>>>>>>>>> we have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The >>>>>>>>>>>> Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I >>>>>>>>>> think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you >>>>>>>>> may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and >>>>>>>>> media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has
broken laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) >>>>>>> broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything
illegal as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since
expired. Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump,
whose misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history >>>>> of this country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>> presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
You certainly have an imagination. Trump did no such thing.
But "the Big Guy" filled his bank accounts with his
drug addict son as VP and after.
illegally for years. Ever read up about the cancer charity scam?
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Sze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
On 7/7/2022 10:17 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never have to deal with his toxic influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I
think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you >>>>>>>> may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and >>>>>>>> media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*)
broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired.
Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>> country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
You certainly have an imagination. Trump did no such thing.
But "the Big Guy" filled his bank accounts with his
drug addict son as VP and after.
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
He drew big enough crowds to beat the Orange Pig. +Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
On 7/7/22 2:10 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
He drew big enough crowds to beat the Orange Pig. +Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
Mr. Luddite <nothere@noland.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in >the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense >secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >authorization.
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media >>>>>>>>> has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken >>>>>>> laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
Mr. Luddite <nothere@noland.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/2022 10:17 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never have to deal with his toxic influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I >>>>>>>>>> think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you >>>>>>>>> may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and >>>>>>>>> media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) >>>>>>> broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired.
Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>>> country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
You certainly have an imagination. Trump did no such thing.
But "the Big Guy" filled his bank accounts with his
drug addict son as VP and after.
Proof?
Mr. Luddite <nothere@noland.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/2022 10:17 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his cult mystique with the right win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sector of the Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never have to deal with his toxic influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> school shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power? That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office. For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I >>>>>>>>>> think the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>>> than Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too >>>>>>>>>> much blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you >>>>>>>>> may think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and >>>>>>>>> media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) >>>>>>> broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired.
Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>>> country has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential election. The illegality continues as he solicits
millions in donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
You certainly have an imagination. Trump did no such thing.
But "the Big Guy" filled his bank accounts with his
drug addict son as VP and after.
Proof?
Mr. Luddite <nothere@noland.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatrecdotboats@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Wayne said:Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats >>>>>>>>>>>>> embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him. >>>>>
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal authorization.
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largelyI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>> big legal issue.
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist Capital Police four days prior?
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal authorization.
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >> 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely >>>>>>>> ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter >>>>>>>>> technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>>> big legal issue.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in >> the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense >> secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >>> 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largelyI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>>>> big legal issue.
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense >>> secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >national guard intervention?
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >national guard intervention?Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked forEither Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >>>> 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>> 2021, attack.===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>>>>> big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >>>> 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>> 2021, attack.===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>>>>> big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff.
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about.
He also described a former White House aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews.
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters?
Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers.
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
out Russia was
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizingBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning.
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan.
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump.
--
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >> >>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >> >>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >> >>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >> >>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >> >>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >> >>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >> >>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >> >>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >> >>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >> >>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >> >>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >> >>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >> >> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com" <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>>>> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>>>>> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Sze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia".
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch.
===
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >>> 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing until >>>>>>>>> he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largelyI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think >>>>>>>>>>>>> the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may >>>>>>>>>>>> think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his >>>>>>>>>> business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>>>> big legal issue.
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's >>>>>>>> try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesnt have the authority to do so in >>> the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense >>> secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But theres no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >national guard intervention?
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com"out Russia was
<wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
real threat to former President Donald Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has >>>>>>>>>>>>> broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared
financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a >>>>>>>>>>>> really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything >>>>>>>>>> illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since
expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>>>>>>>> country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen >>>>>>>>>> from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, >>>>>>>> Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find
political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent >>>>>>> Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and
Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
authorizing
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to
do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting
defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's
your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has brokenIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who
could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>>>>>>>>>>> country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the
impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his
acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
--
* I just want to find 11,780 votes... *
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
On 7/8/2022 9:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6 panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (two
impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied
such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a >>>>>>>>> formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called
b.s. on that. You agree with me. Enough.
He made a formal offer ... via the DOD. It was rejected. It's in a documented timeline (log) of events leading up to Jan 6th.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:20:40 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>>> national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.
It wasn't Trumps place to make any request. The Congress has been very protective of their turf, creating their own police department and
taking responsibility for their own security. If Trump had sent the
DCNG in there without a request from Nancy he would be accused of
imposing martial law. You would be out if front griping about it.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT),
"waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice.
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing >>>> 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>> 2021, attack.===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilI am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has hisCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken >>>>>>>>>>>> laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really >>>>>>>>>>> big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house >>>>>>>>>> could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal >>>>>>>>> as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
On 7/8/2022 8:20 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before giving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared
financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become >>>>>>>>>>>>> a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything >>>>>>>>>>> illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since
expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>>>>>>>>> country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was
stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, >>>>>>>>> Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find
political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the
impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and >>>>>>> Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to
assist
Capital Police four days prior?
authorizing
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the
Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to >>>>>> do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his
acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's
your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.
Semantics. Here's what happened ... very much abbreviated:
The DOD (under Trump) contacted the Capital Police several days
before Jan 6th and offered National Guard assistance.
Capital Police initially refused offer.
Next day Capital Police reassessed the situation and
requested permission to deploy National Guard troops from the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms – both of whom report to House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi and Senate Democrat Leader Chuck Schumer, respectively.
This request was denied. The Capital Police Chief was told to
contact the Wash DC National Guard instead to see if they could
assist.
Meanwhile, the DOD continued preparations to provide federal
National Guard assist if requested. This was Trump's actions.
So did he "officially authorize"? No. He couldn't because his
offer of assistance was rejected.
On 7/9/22 6:50 AM, John H wrote:
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
You right-wing trashmeisters aren't pro-life; you are pro-fetus. Your
idol, Trump, has been tape recorded stating he wanted the Georgia
officials to "find" another 11,000+ votes for him. I hope that results
in one of the indictments against him.
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Sze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesnt have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>> 20,000. But theres no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>> national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but not in
the real world.
On 7/9/22 7:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/2022 9:01 PM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Sze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6 panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (two
impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied >>>>>>>>>> such an
authorization, and experts said she doesnt have the authority >>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But theres no evidence the comment was treated as a >>>>>>>>>> formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>> chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called
b.s. on that. You agree with me. Enough.
He made a formal offer ... via the DOD. It was rejected. It's in a
documented timeline (log) of events leading up to Jan 6th.
The usual suspects among the GOPers have repeatedly made claims that
Trump formally as POTUS made such a request, but he did not.
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com" <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
On 7/9/22 6:50 AM, John H wrote:
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
You right-wing trashmeisters aren't pro-life; you are pro-fetus. Your
idol, Trump, has been tape recorded stating he wanted the Georgia
officials to "find" another 11,000+ votes for him. I hope that results
in one of the indictments against him.
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible."
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?.
--
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country >>>>>>>>>> has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>> national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but not in
the real world.
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
===
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>> chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise
attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who
could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My statement was >solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I stated
he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of >action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the issues I >raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 9:01:05 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has brokenIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that
chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
Your wordsmithing is getting sloppy. The "claim" you were responding to is: "If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
As you have now been taught, The offer was made, and for it to be made it
was "authorized" by Trump, else there would have been no offer.
The "formal request" is your verbiage in an attempt to play gotcha. That was not claimed.
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze <keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
===
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the >>>>>>>> Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>>> chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never >>>>> bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down >>>>> to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise
attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who
could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My statement was >> solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I stated
he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of
action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the issues I >> raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
Maybe you don't understand the separation of powers., Trump CAN'T unilaterally send troops to the Capitol.
He also doesn't "ask" the DCNG anything, They work for him. (the only national guard troops who do) If there was a request from the hill, he
would "order" them to go. He didn't get that request before the riot
was in full swing.
Those are just the facts and you can throw bullshit around all you
like about "formal requests" that do not exist in that command
structure. The only one who makes requests are congress and they did
not make that request. They also waived off the DC police, the Park
Police and all of the other 100+ police agencies in the DC area.
These are just the ones who work for the Federal government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>>> national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
On 7/9/22 11:19 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM,
waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frisky during
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he wasn't
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> views.
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kid with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Where is your written, official proof?Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not. >>>>>>>There is no record of former President Donald TrumpBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he was in
private business and well before he ran for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the power and
influence of an elected office for personal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as >>>>>>>>>>>>> Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops >>>>>>>>>>>>> to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
officially authorizing
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of >>>>>>>>>>>> the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied >>>>>>>>>>>> such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the >>>>>>>>>>>> authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a >>>>>>>>>>>> formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. >>>>>>>>>>> That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch
asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the >>>>>>>>> Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>>>> chain of command.
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never >>>>>> bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down >>>>>> to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know >>>>>> who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s. >>>>> on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise >>>> attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who >>>> could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My
statement was
solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I
stated
he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of >>> action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the
issues I
raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
Maybe you don't understand the separation of powers., Trump CAN'T
unilaterally send troops to the Capitol.
He also doesn't "ask" the DCNG anything, They work for him. (the only
national guard troops who do) If there was a request from the hill, he
would "order" them to go. He didn't get that request before the riot
was in full swing.
Those are just the facts and you can throw bullshit around all you
like about "formal requests" that do not exist in that command
structure. The only one who makes requests are congress and they did
not make that request. They also waived off the DC police, the Park
Police and all of the other 100+ police agencies in the DC area.
These are just the ones who work for the Federal government
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States >>
You are just proving my point, that Trump DID NOT make a formal request.
On 7/9/22 6:50 AM, John H wrote:
"That's not a baby kicking, Karen dear, it's just a fetus!"
You right-wing trashmeisters aren't pro-life; you are pro-fetus. Your
idol, Trump, has been tape recorded stating he wanted the Georgia
officials to "find" another 11,000+ votes for him. I hope that results
in one of the indictments against him.
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before giving >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared
financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did
anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this >>>>>>>>>>>> country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a
presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, >>>>>>>>>> Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the
impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and >>>>>>>> Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
authorizing
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the
Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to >>>>>>> do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his
acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, >>>>>>> not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but not in >>> the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually lazy to
get and keep a student deferment.
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds >>>>>>>>>>> are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>>> national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but
not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually
lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order
to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private business and well before he ran for and won the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things.
Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> influence of an elected office for personal financial gains. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential >>>>>>>>>>>> election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden >>>>>>>>>> asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed >>>>>>>>>> insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political >>>>>>>>>> leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap >>>>>>>>> Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>>>> claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist >>>>>>>> Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, >>>>>>> 2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not >>>>>>> 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized >>>>> national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but not in >>> the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such formal >request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually lazy to
get and keep a student deferment.
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote.
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away
from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else.
If some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the
impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his
acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but
not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually
lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order
to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
On 7/9/22 11:19 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
===On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
===
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Where is your written, official proof?Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not. >>>>>>>There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the >>>>>>>>> Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>>>> chain of command.
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never >>>>>> bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down >>>>>> to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s. >>>>> on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise >>>> attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who >>>> could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My statement was >>> solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I stated >>> he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of >>> action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the issues I >>> raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
Maybe you don't understand the separation of powers., Trump CAN'T
unilaterally send troops to the Capitol.
He also doesn't "ask" the DCNG anything, They work for him. (the only
national guard troops who do) If there was a request from the hill, he
would "order" them to go. He didn't get that request before the riot
was in full swing.
Those are just the facts and you can throw bullshit around all you
like about "formal requests" that do not exist in that command
structure. The only one who makes requests are congress and they did
not make that request. They also waived off the DC police, the Park
Police and all of the other 100+ police agencies in the DC area.
These are just the ones who work for the Federal government
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States >>
You are just proving my point, that Trump DID NOT make a formal request.
On 7/9/2022 1:17 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 11:19 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frisky during
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> threat Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Donald Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And it is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> January 6 panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> persecution of a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> against a person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> views.
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mind of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real. The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hanging your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> court for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kid with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone will point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out Russia was
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Where is your written, official proof?Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not. >>>>>>>>There is no record of former President Donald TrumpBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he was in
private business and well before he ran for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the power and
influence of an elected office for personal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
officially authorizing
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied >>>>>>>>>>>>> such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the >>>>>>>>>>>>> authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a >>>>>>>>>>>>> formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. >>>>>>>>>>>> That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch >>>>>>>>>> asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the >>>>>>>>>> Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>>>>> chain of command.
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never >>>>>>> bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the >>>>>>> separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down >>>>>>> to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know >>>>>>> who
to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s. >>>>>> on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise >>>>> attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who >>>>> could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My
statement was
solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I
stated
he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of >>>> action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the
issues I
raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
Maybe you don't understand the separation of powers., Trump CAN'T
unilaterally send troops to the Capitol.
He also doesn't "ask" the DCNG anything, They work for him. (the only
national guard troops who do) If there was a request from the hill, he
would "order" them to go. He didn't get that request before the riot
was in full swing.
Those are just the facts and you can throw bullshit around all you
like about "formal requests" that do not exist in that command
structure. The only one who makes requests are congress and they did
not make that request. They also waived off the DC police, the Park
Police and all of the other 100+ police agencies in the DC area.
These are just the ones who work for the Federal government
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States >>>
You are just proving my point, that Trump DID NOT make a formal request.
You are playing word games. He made (via the DOD) a formal offer.
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but
not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually
lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order
to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
On 7/9/22 9:59 AM, 345...@gmail.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 9:01:05 PM UTC-4, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Sze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
===
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesnt have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But theres no evidence the comment was treated as a formal >>>>>>>>>> authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the
Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>> chain of command.
Where is your written, official proof?
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never
bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the
separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down
to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s.
on that. You agree with me. Enough.
Your wordsmithing is getting sloppy. The "claim" you were responding to is: >> "If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
As you have now been taught, The offer was made, and for it to be made it
was "authorized" by Trump, else there would have been no offer.
The "formal request" is your verbiage in an attempt to play gotcha. That was not claimed.
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
Sorry, shit for brains, but I'm about the same age as your asshole
friend, Herring, 78, and I'm in better physical, emotional, and mental >condition than he is.
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 13:17:21 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 11:19 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
===
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Where is your written, official proof?Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not. >>>>>>>>There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for >>>>>>>>>> it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the >>>>>>>>>> Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>>>>> chain of command.
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never >>>>>>> bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the >>>>>>> separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down >>>>>>> to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>>>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s. >>>>>> on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to
blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to
breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise >>>>> attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who >>>>> could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or
whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My statement was
solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I stated >>>> he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of >>>> action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the issues I
raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
Maybe you don't understand the separation of powers., Trump CAN'T
unilaterally send troops to the Capitol.
He also doesn't "ask" the DCNG anything, They work for him. (the only
national guard troops who do) If there was a request from the hill, he
would "order" them to go. He didn't get that request before the riot
was in full swing.
Those are just the facts and you can throw bullshit around all you
like about "formal requests" that do not exist in that command
structure. The only one who makes requests are congress and they did
not make that request. They also waived off the DC police, the Park
Police and all of the other 100+ police agencies in the DC area.
These are just the ones who work for the Federal government
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States >>>
You are just proving my point, that Trump DID NOT make a formal request.
You are stuck on a situation that can't exist. It is easy to make up a
false narrative and say it didn't happen.
The President, any president, does not make requests of the DC
national guard, formal or otherwise.
They report to him.
If NANCY had made the formal request, he would have ORDERED the guard
to respond.
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but
not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order
to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital Police!
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today:What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious,
and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the
former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "It is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6 panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their
depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> behind displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway.
===
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch-hunts; noun: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (two
impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hanging your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense.
Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frisky during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.Cute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times.
I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and we
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits >>>>>>>>>>>>>> millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied
such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a >>>>>>>>> formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof.
That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit
you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a
government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but
not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works
if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too
intellectually lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order
to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >> Police!I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence. >>
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 14:17:39 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>===
wrote:
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty
maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one
that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president."
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying
the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical
noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole
exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one
after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by
margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at
his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard
troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally
authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but
not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order
to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
Show me where the Cap Po, the respective Sgt at arms or the leadership
of congress formally requested that help. They are the ONLY ones who
can.
All any president can do is sit in the white house and wait for that
call.
You frame a question based on something that can't happen and then ask
why it didn't. Your argument is simply flawed from the start.
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
===On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >>> Police!I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence. >>>
Ignorance? You seem to boast about your English degree. What is the definition of “insurrection “? 200 protesters, and how many had loaded weapons? Does not meet the definition.
On 7/9/22 9:59 AM, 345...@gmail.com wrote:
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
Sorry, shit for brains, but I'm about the same age as your asshole
friend, Herring, 78, and I'm in better physical, emotional, and mental condition than he is.
On 7/9/22 5:59 PM, Bill wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such >>>>>>> formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >>>> Police!
Ignorance? You seem to boast about your English degree. What is the
definition of “insurrection “? 200 protesters, and how many had loaded >> weapons? Does not meet the definition.
How many out-of-control Trumpsters forcing their way into the Capital,
some armed, breaking down doors and windows, and looking to hang the
vice president of the United States, does it take to meet the definition
of an insurrection?
On 7/9/22 2:49 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 13:17:21 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:19 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 11:08:24 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<keysersoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
<gfretwell@aol.com> wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 21:01:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/8/22 8:46 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 17:24:27 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com"
<3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 8:20:44 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/8/22 1:53 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<Keyse...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <345...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:out Russia was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky during
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
===
From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney in USA Today:running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the most serious,
and most provable crime he committed according to
Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management
and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of staff Mick
Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his view the
real threat to former President Donald Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously defended the
former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in relation to the
Capitol riot. He said he was having difficulty
maintaining that position, however, particularly
after Hutchinson's testimony, which he said he found
"eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that things
could get very dark for the former president,"
Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that Tuesday's hearing
revealed one real threat to Trump that didn't hinge
on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It is the one
that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it is the one
that should most worry the former president."
He referred to the evidence presented by Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 panel
witnesses said they received before giving their
depositions. The messages included allusions to
being a "team player" to "stay in the good graces in
Trump world" as well as a reminder that Trump read
transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind displaying
the messages during the hearing was "crystal clear."
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe they have
evidence that people within the Trump operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," Mulvaney wrote.
"And that, any way you slice it, is obstruction of
justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he wasn't
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you admit, the whole
exercise is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging your hat
on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to charge this guy
over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is not worth the
risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of conviction by 2024.
The court would still be hearing motions by then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court for a school
shooting in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid with few
resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a rich piece of
shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone will point
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
I'm not the one who said the Orange Pig made the requests.Where is your written, official proof?Either Trump made the formal request or he did not...he did not. >>>>>>>>>There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizingBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he was in
private business and well before he ran for and won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many others. Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally authorized
national guard intervention?
Where is any indication at all that the Legislative Branch asked for
it? The president can't unilaterally send federal troops to the >>>>>>>>>>> Capitol. They must be requested by the speaker or someone in that >>>>>>>>>>> chain of command.
Harry has made his living in DC for the last few decades but he never >>>>>>>> bothered to find out how the power structure works there and the >>>>>>>> separation of powers that prevails. I guess that doesn't trickle down >>>>>>>> to lobbyists on K street and their minions. They just need to know who >>>>>>>> to bribe to make their clients happy.
A claim was made here that Trump made a formal request. I called b.s. >>>>>>> on that. You agree with me. Enough.
So it sounds like you admit this witch hunt is all about trying to >>>>>> blame Trump, not what went wrong on Jan 6.
Nobody seems to care that a few hundred unarmed yahoos were able to >>>>>> breach Capitol security and trash the place. It wasn't even a surprise >>>>>> attack. The congressional security people had a month to plan.
You admit Trump talked about whether they needed 10,000 or 20,000
national guard troops but the call never came from the only people who >>>>>> could ask.
BTW I still see this as a security problem. The politics are just
bullshit. Everyone wants to break another Watergate, White Water or >>>>>> whatever. They are all crooks
Let us try again, because plain language seems beyond you. My statement was
solely over whether Trump formally requested the national guard. I stated >>>>> he did not. You are offering me rationales and apologies for his lack of >>>>> action. I don’t give a shit about those because they are not the issues I
raised. Play your word games twitch the Trumpsters.
Maybe you don't understand the separation of powers., Trump CAN'T
unilaterally send troops to the Capitol.
He also doesn't "ask" the DCNG anything, They work for him. (the only
national guard troops who do) If there was a request from the hill, he >>>> would "order" them to go. He didn't get that request before the riot
was in full swing.
Those are just the facts and you can throw bullshit around all you
like about "formal requests" that do not exist in that command
structure. The only one who makes requests are congress and they did
not make that request. They also waived off the DC police, the Park
Police and all of the other 100+ police agencies in the DC area.
These are just the ones who work for the Federal government
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_law_enforcement_in_the_United_States >>>>
You are just proving my point, that Trump DID NOT make a formal request.
You are stuck on a situation that can't exist. It is easy to make up a
false narrative and say it didn't happen.
The President, any president, does not make requests of the DC
national guard, formal or otherwise.
They report to him.
If NANCY had made the formal request, he would have ORDERED the guard
to respond.
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct
justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the
real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was
evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got
dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz
Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have
evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation
attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice."
running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/
nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt"
because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question
is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running
in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never
have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy
over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance.
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >> Police!I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld..
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an >>>>>>>>>>> authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've >>>>>>>> posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft.
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence. >>
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 1:16:35 PM UTC-4, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 7/9/22 9:59 AM, 345...@gmail.com wrote:
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
Sorry, shit for brains, but I'm about the same age as your asshole
friend, Herring, 78, and I'm in better physical, emotional, and mental
condition than he is.
Where is your written, official proof of that?
:)
On Sat, 09 Jul 2022 21:55:24 -0400, John H <jherring@cox.net> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:20:20 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com" ><3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 1:16:35 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 9:59 AM, 345...@gmail.com wrote:
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
Sorry, shit for brains, but I'm about the same age as your asshole
friend, Herring, 78, and I'm in better physical, emotional, and mental
condition than he is.
Where is your written, official proof of that?
:)
He sure as hell won't walk a golf course with me!
Ignorance is your savior.
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:20:20 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com" ><3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 1:16:35 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 9:59 AM, 345...@gmail.com wrote:
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
Sorry, shit for brains, but I'm about the same age as your asshole
friend, Herring, 78, and I'm in better physical, emotional, and mental
condition than he is.
Where is your written, official proof of that?
:)
He sure as hell won't walk a golf course with me!
On 7/9/22 5:59 PM, Bill wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such >>>>>>> formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >>>> Police!
Ignorance? You seem to boast about your English degree. What is the
definition of “insurrection “? 200 protesters, and how many had loaded >> weapons? Does not meet the definition.
How many out-of-control Trumpsters forcing their way into the Capital,
some armed, breaking down doors and windows, and looking to hang the
vice president of the United States, does it take to meet the definition
of an insurrection?
B/R & Behind TV On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:05:24 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
===On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's
Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things
could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing
consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt
/?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed
witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it.
I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his
cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in
the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit
and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the
risk for the
slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school
shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to
present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of
shit who has
always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >>> Police!I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is JoeIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such
formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence. >>>
The Cap Po had machine guns. The rioters had a few pointy flag sticks.
That is unarmed.
The only homicide came at the hands of the Cap Po.
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:20:20 -0700 (PDT), "345...@gmail.com" <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 1:16:35 PM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 9:59 AM, 345...@gmail.com wrote:
I know you are knocking on 90, but is any of this getting through?
Sorry, shit for brains, but I'm about the same age as your asshole
friend, Herring, 78, and I'm in better physical, emotional, and mental
condition than he is.
Where is your written, official proof of that?
:)
He sure as hell won't walk a golf course with me!
On 7/9/22 8:23 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
B/R & Behind TV On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:05:24 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaneyrunning in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump
should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel
witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or
group holding unorthodox or unpopular views. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is
designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th
amendment)
Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections?
I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in
2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore.
It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such anThere is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>>> authorizing===Biden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's >>>>>>>>>>>> your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG. >>>>>>>> Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such >>>>>>> formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to
engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital >>>> Police!
The Cap Po had machine guns. The rioters had a few pointy flag sticks.
That is unarmed.
The only homicide came at the hands of the Cap Po.
Testimony at the hearings says some of the TrumpTrash was armed with >firearms. It's too bad the police didn't shoot a few dozen of the >insurrectionists.
On 7/10/22 12:13 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 08:12:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 8:23 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
B/R & Behind TV On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:05:24 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaneybe taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to
obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that
things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It
is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it
is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6
panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind
displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts;
noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of
a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging
your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free
elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
during
Obama's watch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such an >>>>>>> offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to >>>>>>> engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authorizingBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of
power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of
office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood
by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more
than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial
gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting
too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they
leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
*are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out
that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a
GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority
to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's
your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such >>>>>>>>> formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually
lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital
Police!
The Cap Po had machine guns. The rioters had a few pointy flag sticks. >>>> That is unarmed.
The only homicide came at the hands of the Cap Po.
Testimony at the hearings says some of the TrumpTrash was armed with
firearms. It's too bad the police didn't shoot a few dozen of the
insurrectionists.
"Testimony" at that witch hunt seems to be a lot of gossip that
wouldn't last 10 seconds in a courtroom but the congress lets it go on
for days.
How many people are charged with carrying a firearm?
How many firearms were actually seen?
Who was shot?
Who did all of the shooting?
Those are not the issues. The issues include the facts that some of the deranged trumpsters were armed with firearms, trump knew it, he asked
that the magnetometers be shut down, and he did not object to Pence
being hanged. At some point you boys are going to have to face the
reality of trump.
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 08:12:47 -0400, Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/9/22 8:23 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
B/R & Behind TV On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:05:24 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaney
in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch.
b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many
others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your hat
on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base.
I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few
resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
Obama's watch
and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such an >>>>>> offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to >>>>>> engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>>>> authorizingBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions
and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *are*) broken
leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's
your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such >>>>>>>> formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually >>>>>>>> lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase >>>>>>> it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry >>>>>>> claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital
Police!
The Cap Po had machine guns. The rioters had a few pointy flag sticks.
That is unarmed.
The only homicide came at the hands of the Cap Po.
Testimony at the hearings says some of the TrumpTrash was armed with
firearms. It's too bad the police didn't shoot a few dozen of the
insurrectionists.
"Testimony" at that witch hunt seems to be a lot of gossip that
wouldn't last 10 seconds in a courtroom but the congress lets it go on
for days.
How many people are charged with carrying a firearm?
How many firearms were actually seen?
Who was shot?
Who did all of the shooting?
On 7/10/22 12:13 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:2F99f75ab4481499aab953bee3ff59%2Fcolor-edit-toon-trump-on-nato-and-russia.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 08:12:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 8:23 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
B/R & Behind TV On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 17:05:24 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:22 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 2:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/9/2022 1:19 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/9/22 11:25 AM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2022 08:38:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
<KeyserSöze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/9/22 6:46 AM, John H wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 13:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Keyser Soze
<KeyserSoze@whitehouse.com> wrote:
345...@gmail.com <3452471@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 4:53:42 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
Mr. Luddite <not...@noland.com> wrote:
On 7/7/2022 2:10 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:17:12 -0400, Keyser Söze >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
On 7/7/22 6:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 3:51 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 2:20:17 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:49:22 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/6/2022 10:38 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:41:52 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/6/2022 1:42 AM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 7:13:34 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/4/2022 4:02 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 06:55:57 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <not...@noland.com>
wrote:
On 7/3/2022 8:01 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:19:49 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" <wayne.b...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2022 at 7:00:11 AM UTC-4, Mr. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Luddite wrote:
On 7/2/2022 4:53 PM, waynebatr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2022 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-4, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 2 Jul 2022 07:39:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
<not...@noland.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:===
On 7/1/2022 4:58 PM, gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:56:20 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>out Russia was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty quiet on Trump's watch. They got frisky
On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 2:27:15 PM UTC-4,
gfre...@aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:33:30 -0700 (PDT), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "waynebatr...@hotmail.com" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <wayne.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
===From an op-ed article by Mick Mulvaneybe taking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that option away >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from him anyway. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
in USA Today: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's quite likely that Trump attempted to
obstruct >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, which may turn out to be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most serious, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and most provable crime he committed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Budget; White House Chief of Staff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Per Mulvaney, such claims are the threat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be most worried about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He also described a former White House >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aide's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday testimony as "eminently credible."
The former acting White House chief of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff Mick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote on Wednesday that in his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> view the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real threat to former President Donald >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that might lead to accusations of
obstruction of justice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney wrote that he had previously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defended the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> former president against claims that he did
"anything illegal or criminal" in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relation to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Capitol riot. He said he was having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintaining that position, however, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Hutchinson's testimony, which he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said he found >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "eminently credible." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Because after some of the bombshells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that got >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dropped in that hearing, my guess is that
things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could get very dark for the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney also said, though, that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tuesday's hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revealed one real threat to Trump that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't hinge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on Hutchinson's words or credibility. "It
is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that jumped out at me," he wrote. "And it
is the one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that should most worry the former >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> president." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He referred to the evidence presented by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rep. Liz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheney of Wyoming toward the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hearing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consisting of two messages that January 6
panel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnesses said they received before >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depositions. The messages included >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allusions to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being a "team player" to "stay in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good graces in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump world" as well as a reminder that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump read >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transcripts of interviews. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mulvaney said that the implication behind
displaying >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the messages during the hearing was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "crystal clear." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The Jan. 6 committee members believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence that people within the Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempted to intimidate witnesses," >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mulvaney wrote. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "And that, any way you slice it, is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obstruction of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you want to bet, if Trump said he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running in 2024, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whole witch hunt evaporates. De Santis may
witch-hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /?wiCH ?h?nt/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nounhistorical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noun: witch-hunt; plural noun: witch-hunts;
noun:
witchhunt; plural noun: witchhunts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a) search for and subsequent persecution of
a supposed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b) informal: a campaign directed against a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group holding unorthodox or unpopular views.
I take some exception to your use of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "witch-hunt" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of its implication of a search for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that isn't real. In my mind, and the mind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of many >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others, Trump's criminality is very real. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how best to prove it, and how best to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> punish it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure it's enough to just keep him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from running >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2024 but that's a good start. I'd like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to see his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cult mystique with the right win sector of the
Republican party totally annihilated so >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to deal with his toxic influence again.
The whole process bothers me. Even you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admit, the whole >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exercise is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed to prevent him from running again (two
impeachments, one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he left office and now you are hanging
your hat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the 14th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amendment) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't this supposed to be up to the voters? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you folks so afraid of open and free
elections? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would much prefer that he simply gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clobbered in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primaries by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> margins too great to protest. De Santis is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already
chipping away at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his base. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I still believe the risks of trying to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge this guy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the social upheaval it might cause is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not worth the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risk for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> slim chance you can get any kind of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conviction by 2024. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The court would still be hearing motions by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then.
I mentioned before, Cruz is still in court >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a school >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shooting in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2018 and it was a slam dunk against a kid >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with few >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resources to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present a defense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump may be a piece of shit but he is a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rich piece of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit who has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always been surrounded by lawyers. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Even Biden the Bozo isn't blaming Trump for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's all "Russia, Russia, Russia". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Biden has to be a little careful or someone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will point
during
Obama's watch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and started a war on Biden's watch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Putin had Trump right where he wanted him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want
to upset the balance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://cdn.forumcomm.com/dims4/default/cc2560c/2147483647/strip/false/crop/3259x2423+0+0/resize/1486x1105!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforum-communications-production-web.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbrightspot%2F5d%2F6e%
Ignorance is your savior.I haven't seen any documentation that Trump seriously made such an >>>>>>> offer, especially in light of his urging on his thug followers to >>>>>>> engage in armed insurrection of the capital and the hanging of Mike Pence.There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authorizingBiden has enough juice at DoJ to have them slow walk this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing untilWhen I think of corruption I am not thinking bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policies, etc.I would put the stick in the dirt when GHWB took >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office and weCute.
It's obvious you have an intense dislike for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump which is
understandable. Based on your many posts about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him, your
dislike goes back a long ways ... back when he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was in
private business and well before he ran for and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won the
Presidency.
But, if you can put that intense dislike and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bias aside for
a moment, do you really feel the USA is in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better positions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and conditions, economically, domestically and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globally
today compared to four years ago?. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
The seeds of inflation were planted on Trump's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watch with
the Quantitative Easing program. It helped to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep the
economy afloat during the Covid crisis but now >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were paying
the price. The same can be said for the global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supply chain
crisis. Could Trump have done anything about it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if still in
office? Frankly I doubt it. He would have done a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good job of
blaming it on someone else however. That's his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
talent. Does it not matter to you that he tried >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to overthrow
an election and obstruct the peaceful transfer of
power?
That is the bedrock of our democracy, and Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reminds us
of how fragile it can be. The vast majority of the
electorate saw through his bluff, bluster and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bullshit in
the 2020 election and rightfully voted him out of
office.
For better or worse Biden was the only choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For that we
can thank the feckless Republican party who stood
by their
flawed candidate while the ship was burning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Obama fiscal policy rewarded his rich >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors,
bankers and
Wall Street but it left the middle class >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffering. The more
we hear
about who actually got the money the more pissed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are.
They are
really just scratching the surface of the massive >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fraud with
a few
small timers who got charged. The big players who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> raked in
millions
and padded their bottom line with it, like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airlines are still
free to
do it again.
I have a hunch that history will record the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama/Biden years
as being
the most corrupt in modern times. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
have
suffered from bad leadership since. That is both on the
corporate and
government side. The corporations adopted a 90 day >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> window for
their
decision making, just trying to make good quarterly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> numbers, not
really building anything and they were supported by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
mentality
in Washington. It was all about how Wall Street is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing with
no real
concern with how things are going on Main Street, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what we do
next year
or how we will ever service the debt they incurred. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats
embraced Rubin, Summers, Geithner and Greenspan more
than the
Republicans.
We can complain about the American oligarchs like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jobs, Bezos
and Musk
but at least they were building things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Musk and Bezos are pretty frustrated with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government too.
I am thinking corruption in the sense of using the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power and
influence of an elected office for personal financial
gains.
Biden is a perfect example of a smiling, career >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> politician who
has his
hand out everywhere. Hunter's laptop will eventually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do him in.
I don't think GWB was corrupt in this sense. You can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue his
policies but there's no evidence anywhere of him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personally
gaining by them financially, at least not by plan. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This will irk Wayne and Harry but neither did Trump. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
===
I'm not irked at all, in fact I agree with you about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GWB. I think
the jury is still out on Biden but no one is more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corrupt than
Trump. It's in his genes. GWBs big failing was putting
too much
blind faith in Cheney and Rumsfeld.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think the jury may be closer to a decision on Biden >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than you may
think.
Have you followed and considered any of the Hunter laptop
revelations or
have you chosen to ignore them as most of the liberal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> press and media
has?
===
I've mostly ignored the Hunter allegations since he's justIf some of the allegations are true (I am not saying they
leveraging his family connections like so many others. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Joe
responsible for the actions of his adult son? If Hunter >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has broken
laws he should be prosecuted like anyone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
*are*) broken
laws may extend beyond Hunter. In fact, it could turn out
that Hunter
technically broke no laws but if his daddy shared >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> financially in his
business activities, especially when VP, this could >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become a really
big legal issue.
he is out of office, then he hopes nobody will care. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> media largely
ignores this anyway. I suppose, if Trump is a precedent, a
GOP house
could still impeach him from his VP office, 10 years later.
===
Even in the unlikely event that Biden the senior did >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything illegal
as VP, the statute of limitations will have long since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired. Let's
try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> misdeeds
are current and ongoing. No one else in the history of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this country
has illegally tried to stay in power after losing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> presidential
election. The illegality continues as he solicits millions in
donations under the false pretext that the election was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stolen from him.
Wayne said:
"Let's try to remember that this discussion is about Trump, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
misdeeds are current and ongoing."
Given the record so far of his presidency, the discussion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really
*should* be about Biden. He's running out of people to blame.
Because, of course, when the Obama-Biden Admin came to an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end, Biden
asked his supporters to come to D.C., and plan and commit an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armed
insurrection against the House of Representatives and find >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> political
leaders and execute them.
Biden couldn't draw a big enough crowd to even scare the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impotent Cap
Po.
If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Harry
claim why did he authorized and offer National Guard troops to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assist
Capital Police four days prior?
20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan. 6,
2021, attack.
There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an
authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority
to do so in
the first place.
A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acting defense
secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troops, not
20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal
authorization.
The ultra-liberal fake news rag Vanity Fair is not proof. That's
your go-to source?
There's no wonder you are so ill-informed.
Where is your written, official proof Shithead Trump formally >>>>>>>>>>>>> authorized
national guard intervention?
Read, dipshit. This is much closer to 'proof' than any bullshit you've
posted:
https://mynbc15.com/news/nation-world/trump-admin-was-ready-to-deploy-national-guard-on-jan-6-capitol-police-timeline-shows-january-donald
A news report, shit for brains, is not written, official proof of a >>>>>>>>>>> government action. Might work for you and your moron buddies, but >>>>>>>>>>> not in
the real world.
Your moron buddies do not have a clue how the chain of command works >>>>>>>>>> if you think the president "formally requests" anything from the DCNG.
Maybe that is what happens when you successfully dodge the draft. >>>>>>>>>
I wasn't the one making such a claim; I stated Trump made no such >>>>>>>>> formal request. And it isn't my fault that you were too intellectually
lazy to get and keep a student deferment.
You have successfully obscured this discussion with semantics in order >>>>>>>> to avoid answering the original question posed. Permit me to rephrase
it for your benefit:
"If Trump organized an armed insurrection on Jan 6th as Wayne and Harry
claim why did he offer National Guard troops to assist
Capital Police four days prior?"
Armed insurrection? Seems as if the only armed aggression was the Capital
Police!
The Cap Po had machine guns. The rioters had a few pointy flag sticks. >>>> That is unarmed.
The only homicide came at the hands of the Cap Po.
Testimony at the hearings says some of the TrumpTrash was armed with
firearms. It's too bad the police didn't shoot a few dozen of the
insurrectionists.
"Testimony" at that witch hunt seems to be a lot of gossip that
wouldn't last 10 seconds in a courtroom but the congress lets it go on
for days.
How many people are charged with carrying a firearm?
How many firearms were actually seen?
Who was shot?
Who did all of the shooting?
Those are not the issues. The issues include the facts that some of the >deranged trumpsters were armed with firearms, trump knew it, he asked
that the magnetometers be shut down, and he did not object to Pence
being hanged. At some point you boys are going to have to face the
reality of trump.
Keyser Söze <KeyserSöz...@whitehouse.com> wrote:
Those are not the issues. The issues include the facts that some of the deranged trumpsters were armed with firearms, trump knew it, he asked
that the magnetometers be shut down, and he did not object to Pence
being hanged. At some point you boys are going to have to face the
reality of trump.
Proof he had the magnetometer shutdown? How could he shut them down, it is the Pelosi and Congress who control their area.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 19:44:41 |
| Calls: | 10,390 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,964 |