One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Trump Eats At One's Soul
Page <<first <prev 11 of 18 next> last>>
May 12, 2019 21:41:04   #
Navigator
 
byronglimish wrote:
Who are you replying too? If you hit "quote reply" under the certain poster, that person will know it's them.


Thanks. I hit "Reply" underneath the comment I wanted to reply to like I do in every other blog, typed my post and hit send. My reply then ended up on a totally different page that the post I was replying to was not even on. I followed your advice and no my comment appears to be part of the original post I was attempting to reply to, as this probably will. How do I get my reply to appear as a separate, easily identifiable reply?

Reply
May 12, 2019 21:43:19   #
Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon
 
Navigator wrote:
When it comes to the d******eness of today's politics, I am beginning to think that the Russians that spent so much money and effort to swing the e******n to put this fox ( aka Trump) in the hen-house…must have spent a goodly amount of money on a roomful of social psychologists also.

They want Trump to call American laws that have stood for 250 years…unlawful…. and he has brought that idea into question many times.

They know he is un-educated, so he will know nothing of American or global history, laws or processes. As a classic, classless blowhard, he will loudly deride what he does not understand. He has done just that with every legitimate American institution that we have trusted since 1776.

They expect Trump to create d******eness in the people by using politics as a wedge. Again, Trump plays right into their efforts by telling lies to a certain sector of the American populace who can identify with his lies and in turn becomes a cult following. Those that remember the Jones cult in Guyana will identify with what Trump is doing. His lies are so believable to these poor people, there is no other t***h but Trump.
They know Trump can talk a line of BS and outright lies that sounds so very convincing. They know he has spent a lifetime conning everyone possible in business and life. No one will know what to expect him to start blabbering on or lying about next which will sow never-ending chaos. So it has come to pass.

That he is so self-serving and greed-driven this will conflict with what we expect of a fair president and that this will cause very questionable behavior on his and his major republican supporter's part.

They know that a segment of the Republican Party, driven by the same greed as Trump's, will join him, defend him and push him further with whispers in his ear. They will use him as a malleable chump to destruct parts of our laws and land so they can put their fingers in the biggest jackpot ever offered to them, the taxpayers of America.

They could not have chosen a better person of the job of taking American values apart, denying the freedoms we have enjoyed since the Bill of Rights was signed or to do a good job of backstabbing the very people that he claims to work for. Trump has spent a good portion of his presidency working with his political and financial backers dismantling the law and economic structure of our land so that they can reap the economic benefits of free tax money. It's all there in black and white cross-indexable print.

His ego is so powerful, his empathy so lacking, that he feels nothing as he hugs the American f**g one moment to show his supporters that he loves the land, then sits down and signs an executive order that rolls back a regulation that will poison thousands of his own people the very next moment. (the dumping of toxins into the waterways rollback, etc.)

He will stand in front of thousands of his supporters, talk (lie) for an hour about how (bigly) America will be under his direction. A virtual sea of red MAGA hats will cheer him on, the adulation washed over him as a wave of ‘we love you Trump’, ‘ you're our god because you care about us little people’ and he will exhort them to ‘be patriots’ and ‘be his people’. He and his twisted egotism feeds off these poor folks grand dreams and expectations. He plays them like the proverbial fiddle. The very next day, he signs a budget that was a direct attack on those very same people that cheered him on, v**ed for him, thinks of him as a god among men. He and his helpers signed a proposal that would take huge amounts of food from the mouths of his own support base , their children, their parents. He signed that proposal that would take away many needed schoolteacher and after-school programs, indeed the whole public education system and put it directly into the hands of his friends in the private education sector. They would not even be able to afford to go to school. They would remain ignorant, which is right where he and his republican backers want them.

Trump's people (seem to) have no idea, they don’t even seem to care.

That is how bad Trump can eat souls like some kid eats candy.

If there is one thing about America today that can truly be called f**e, it is Donald Trump.
When it comes to the d******eness of today's polit... (show quote)



In your post I believe you mean the Russians when you say "They". This is demonstrably false. I would say every sentence you have written falls into the same category except I would then be under estimating as there are many sentences that have more than one demonstrably false statement. In delivering an opinion of your post I cannot conclude that you are dumb as a post or brainwashed but that you are an extraordinary liar. I don't mean extraordinary in that you are a very good liar b/c you are not; I mean extraordinary in that you can not, in a fairly long post, utter even one thing that is demonstrably true.[/quote]



Your lord and saviour Obama is a legend at various bathhouses, a homosexual who pushed perversion upon the populous, his husband is a q***r too.

You supported and hung onto to his every word.

By your own reasoning, you would be a potential q***r or g****r dysphoria person too.

Reply
May 12, 2019 21:46:25   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
Navigator wrote:
Thanks. I hit "Reply" underneath the comment I wanted to reply to like I do in every other blog, typed my post and hit send. My reply then ended up on a totally different page that the post I was replying to was not even on. I followed your advice and no my comment appears to be part of the original post I was attempting to reply to, as this probably will. How do I get my reply to appear as a separate, easily identifiable reply?


You just did it.

Reply
 
 
May 12, 2019 21:46:28   #
Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon
 
Navigator wrote:
Thanks. I hit "Reply" underneath the comment I wanted to reply to like I do in every other blog, typed my post and hit send. My reply then ended up on a totally different page that the post I was replying to was not even on. I followed your advice and no my comment appears to be part of the original post I was attempting to reply to, as this probably will. How do I get my reply to appear as a separate, easily identifiable reply?


Something is messed up with this thread it just rearranged mine to.

Reply
May 12, 2019 22:16:23   #
Radiance3
 
whitnebrat wrote:
Selective statistics are always a good way to try to justify your position. While true, you totally ignore the popular v**e and the fact that it was selective counties in particular districts that were targeted by Russian Facebook ads that influenced the E*******l College. As previously stated, the popular v**e was totally in the opposite direction by 2.3 million v**es.
Yes, this 'radical Dem' does have a complaint. I get somewhat irritated when actual facts and data are manipulated to prove an outcome that is contradicted by the full weight of those same statistics and facts when taken in total, rather than selectively put forth.
Selective statistics are always a good way to try ... (show quote)


====================
Be informed that the popular v**e alone, does not decide the victory of the p**********l e******n. The E*******l College V**es do. Why? Even when the popular v**e for the 5 most populated US States, provided Hillary more v**es than candidate Trump. But counting the overall E*******l College V**es, and candidate Trump had more, Candidate Trump is still the winner of the p**********l e******n even when Hillary Clinton got more popular v**es.

The purpose of deciding the E*******l College v**e is to allowing all 50 US States to participate in the e******n process.

If would be better if the winning candidate had won both the popular and E*******l College V**es. But if the candidate has more e*******l v**es than the other candidate, that decides the winner. As in this case of Trump vs Clinton.


------------
Based on your comment below, I think you have deficiency or the inability to comprehend the report.

The Mueller report presented to DOJ was with NO RUSSIA COLLUSION. You rewrote or made up your own.


Here is what you wrote. The opposite of the facts.
“First, the Mueller report did not state that there was no collusion, which it could
have, but merely stated that there was insufficient evidence to legally charge someone with conspiracy ... which is a very difficult thing to prove in a court of law.
Second, Mueller did state that there was insufficient evidence to prove obstruction, but in the second part of that sentence (which you left out) he stated that he could not exonerate the president, either.”


It is not the duty of he Special Council to exonerate. His duty is to examine and arrive at his findings, then report to DOJ.

Here is the actual and final Conclusion.
By Mark Mazzetti and Katie Benner
• March 24, 2019
WASHINGTON — The investigation led by Robert S. Mueller III found no evidence that President Trump or any of his aides coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 e******n i**********e, according to a summary of the special counsel’s key findingsmade public on Sunday by Attorney General William P. Barr.


The 2nd Conclusion:
Mueller report did not able to reach a final conclusion, because there were not sufficient evidence to prove the case, or there were no compelling evidence to prove the case. Because of that, the most appropriate and correct decision is NO Obstruction. Justice don’t accuse obstruction due to LACK OF SUFFIFIENT EVIDENCE beyond reasonable doubts.

That was the report forwarded to DOJ Bar. Therefore DOJ Barr concluded a Summary report of NO Russia Collusion, and No Obstruction based on the Mueller report due to lack of sufficient evidence, beyond reasonable doubts.
That is the job of the DOJ.


Again you have wrong assessment on this one.

That's just flat wrong. The Mueller report is just that, a report. Congress has a perfect right to investigate not only what is in the report but additional facts and allegations as they see fit.

Mueller's Report goes to DOJ, to issues the final report, and that is final.
Conclusion from the Mueller Report about the Obstruction.
The Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.
Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.


Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.

Reply
May 12, 2019 22:57:30   #
maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee
 
Navigator wrote:
Thanks. I hit "Reply" underneath the comment I wanted to reply to like I do in every other blog, typed my post and hit send. My reply then ended up on a totally different page that the post I was replying to was not even on. I followed your advice and no my comment appears to be part of the original post I was attempting to reply to, as this probably will. How do I get my reply to appear as a separate, easily identifiable reply?


Just hit the Quote Reply button. This will give you a window with the whole post that you are replying to. I usually drop down a few lines so as to separate MY lines from the ones I'm replying to. When you are through typing, hit the Preview button.
This will show, usually, the first line or two of the post you are replying to in the beige area above the window you were typing into, followed by your entire post. There will be a new button labeled Edit if you need to change anything. After several minutes, the button will fade away and you are stuck with what you have written.
Also, if you want to add a photo, there is a Browse button that lets you select from your computer. Once you have added your photo, the hit Add Attachment button to post your pic.
Hope this is as clear as mud.

Reply
May 12, 2019 23:02:30   #
Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall
 
maximus wrote:
Just hit the Quote Reply button. This will give you a window with the whole post that you are replying to. I usually drop down a few lines so as to separate MY lines from the ones I'm replying to. When you are through typing, hit the Preview button.
This will show, usually, the first line or two of the post you are replying to in the beige area above the window you were typing into, followed by your entire post. There will be a new button labeled Edit if you need to change anything. After several minutes, the button will fade away and you are stuck with what you have written.
Also, if you want to add a photo, there is a Browse button that lets you select from your computer. Once you have added your photo, the hit Add Attachment button to post your pic.
Hope this is as clear as mud.
Just hit the Quote Reply button. This will give yo... (show quote)


Clear as mud?

That's a new one for me

Hope you have been well

Reply
 
 
May 12, 2019 23:04:48   #
maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee
 
Rose42 wrote:
I don't disagree with all of it but I have to wonder if the author looks just as honestly at what the democrats are doing and have done to this country. I'll bet the answer to that is no.


I'd bet money on that too, Rose!

Reply
May 12, 2019 23:27:50   #
maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee
 
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Clear as mud?

That's a new one for me

Hope you have been well
Clear as mud? img src="https://static.onepolitica... (show quote)


I've been OK but sleep has been an issue for 4 or 5 days.

Ha ha, clear as mud means I probably made it worse for him.
Whinebrat sent me a pfd on Buddhism but I haven't had time to read it yet.

I had to work last night at a multi million dollar park in Chattanooga called Miller Park. It's one block square. It's a homeless hangout. When it got time to shut the bathrooms down, one toilet was full of crap and the fold down diaper change station had been used as a table and the offender left all the trash right there, including chicken bones on the floor. Sometimes they crap in the lavatories. They bathe, wash clothes, do wh**ever in the restrooms...it's terrible.
For the first time in my whole career as a security officer, I had to use command voice, and it was on a woman. She was cursing at the top of her voice, had tattoos all over her, no teeth, and 2 babies. She was a typical white trash redneck. D********g. An embarrassment to the human race. I'm totally glad not to work there every day!
I hope you are well, friend Kyle!

Reply
May 12, 2019 23:31:29   #
maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee
 
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Not at all...

The cut and paste was the correct method...
I simply found this author more obnoxious than most...
The gist was lost in his wording...
I had to read it several times to get it...


I still haven't "gotten" it...looks like just another Trump bash to me (so far, anyway).

Reply
May 13, 2019 00:00:23   #
maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee
 
whitnebrat wrote:
None of the people that know me consider me to be a "h**e infected cretin". While they may disagree with my viewpoints, that term does not resonate. But I don't take it personally, considering the source. However, you might show some civility once in a while ... but I'm not holding my breath.


Hello, whitnebrat, I don't consider you h**eful, nor can you be according to your philosophy. To me, there was no division of the country until T***p w*n the e******n. There were some issues leading up to the e******n, but when the e******n came...BAM..half of the country pitched a fit ( seemed like to me) and pretty much said, "We ain't gonna accept Trump...he's got to go!" Looks to me like that message has only gotten louder in 2 1/2 years. Now tell me, after all the hope was based on Mueller and the report failed to convict Trump of anything, didn't bells start ringing in your head when Mueller suddenly became a t*****r? Doesn't that smell kinda rotten in that it says democrats and liberals WILL NOT STOP UNTIL THEY GET THEIR WAY!!!
I know you are intelligent as you live by a philosophy that requires intelligence. Doesn't it strike you that if you shoot at somebody 32,000 times, ONE of those bullets will get lucky and take the target down? Is that the way Americans want the country to run? Does that not destroy the illusion that presidents are elected when a duly elected president cannot run the country because of defense, defense, defense all the time? Are we going to replace the rule of law with "We will never stop until we convict you of something!!!"
I for one hope that's not the case.

Reply
 
 
May 13, 2019 00:26:26   #
John King
 
byronglimish wrote:
Who are you replying too? If you hit "quote reply" under the certain poster, that person will know it's them.


As I read the comment you are referring to, I had made a direct connection to the first original topic comment found on page one! Though your point is well taken, I would say you're making something out of nothing!

.....just my opinion!

Reply
May 13, 2019 00:28:10   #
John King
 
byronglimish wrote:
Who are you replying too? If you hit "quote reply" under the certain poster, that person will know it's them.


She is obviously replying to the original topic comment!

Reply
May 13, 2019 04:38:08   #
Ricktloml
 
archie bunker wrote:
Obstruction of what? Not colluding?


Ah yes, obstructing a non-crime. What these Trump h**ers consider obstruction is an innocent man bitterly complaining about a political witch hunt, that is ongoing. Of course there was nothing but excuses when Hillary destroyed e-mails, bleached bit her computer, smashed her phones and other devices with hammers. They declared her cleared of wrong doing

Reply
May 13, 2019 05:14:17   #
whitnebrat Loc: In the wilds of Oregon
 
Radiance3 wrote:


Based on your comment below, I think you have deficiency or the inability to comprehend the report.

The Mueller report presented to DOJ was with NO RUSSIA COLLUSION. You rewrote or made up your own.


Here is what you wrote. The opposite of the facts.
“First, the Mueller report did not state that there was no collusion, which it could
have, but merely stated that there was insufficient evidence to legally charge someone with conspiracy ... which is a very difficult thing to prove in a court of law."
br br b Based on your comment below, I think yo... (show quote)

Once again, the universe of "alternate facts" has taken what appear to be simple, non-controversial words on the page and put them into the class of "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
The fact that there was no collusion proven does NOT mean that it did not occur.
First, there is no legal definition of 'collusion'. Second, the closest thing to it is 'conspiracy', which is notoriously difficult to prove in a court of law. Mueller states that the reason that there may have been no evidence is because many witnesses with direct knowledge either refused to talk to the Special Counsel or that they lied when questioned. That makes it difficult to get at the t***h. Yes, no evidence of conspiracy was found, but that does not mean that it did not exist.
Michael Cohen stated that the way that the president works is that he never gives a direct order, but merely intimates that "it would be nice if 'such and such' were to happen." This insulates him from being responsible for underlings to take up that intimation and acting on it. He never ordered it.
Quote:
Second, Mueller did state that there was insufficient evidence to prove obstruction, but in the second part of that sentence (which you left out) he stated that he could not exonerate the president, either.”

It is not the duty of he Special Council to exonerate. His duty is to examine and arrive at his findings, then report to DOJ.

If the words 'cannot exonerate' mean what I was brought up to believe that the dictionary defines them as, there cannot be any exoneration based on available evidence. He cannot be proven to have obstructed, nor can he be proven to have not done so.
The duty of the Special Counsel was to derive facts and arrive at a legal conclusion as to their veracity. When those facts, while suspected to exist, cannot be derived because of witness non-cooperation or outright lying, it becomes impossible to get at the real t***h.
Quote:

Here is the actual and final Conclusion.
By Mark Mazzetti and Katie Benner
• March 24, 2019
WASHINGTON — The investigation led by Robert S. Mueller III found no evidence that President Trump or any of his aides coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 e******n i**********e, according to a summary of the special counsel’s key findings made public on Sunday by Attorney General William P. Barr.


The 2nd Conclusion:
Mueller report did not able to reach a final conclusion, because there were not sufficient evidence to prove the case, or there were no compelling evidence to prove the case. Because of that, the most appropriate and correct decision is NO Obstruction. Justice don’t accuse obstruction due to LACK OF SUFFIFIENT EVIDENCE beyond reasonable doubts.

That was the report forwarded to DOJ Bar. Therefore DOJ Barr concluded a Summary report of NO Russia Collusion, and No Obstruction based on the Mueller report due to lack of sufficient evidence, beyond reasonable doubts.
That is the job of the DOJ.


Again you have wrong assessment on this one.

That's just flat wrong. The Mueller report is just that, a report. Congress has a perfect right to investigate not only what is in the report but additional facts and allegations as they see fit.

Mueller's Report goes to DOJ, to issues the final report, and that is final.
Conclusion from the Mueller Report about the Obstruction.
The Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.
Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.


Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.
br b Here is the actual and final Conclusion. br... (show quote)

<sigh> First, I have no idea who the authors are or where they publish. Therefore there is no basis upon which to judge their accuracy or bias (if any).
Congress has the right to investigate wh**ever they want to, being a CO-EQUAL branch of government. To say that it cannot investigate and that the report is a "final" conclusion, flies in the face of years of previous administrations, Congresses and precedents.
Next, the AG made those conclusions at a superficial level without examining the underlying evidence and double-checking what the Special Counsel found. They are his opinions only, and only pertain to the legal definitions as to chargeable offenses. Again, the legal breakpoint for charging someone is far higher than what the evidence proved.
Your quote from the report itself, prove my point. Mueller was bound by the Justice Department Guidelines that prohibit charging or indicting a sitting president. Over seven hundred prosecutors have said openly that the ten-plus obvious obstruction incidents were more than enough to prosecute anyone but the president for that crime. Yes, Mueller said that that particular issue didn't come up, but I would venture that it was the 900-pound gorilla sitting in the corner. The burden of proof had to be so legally great as to overcome that restriction ... which would not have applied in any other instance.
Your statistics on the investigation are repetitively redundant. We all concede that they are correct. What we do not concede is a) that the AG drew the proper conclusion and b) he has the right to not forward the unredacted report to Congress. The reasons given for not forwarding the report are invalid on their face and obstructive in their own right. If past is prologue, they will fight it in court and probably lose. I suspect that they will probably try to ignore the court opinion as they have the Congressional subpoena, and where we go from there is anybody's guess.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 11 of 18 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.