Trump

[04_Sport_LS]

Sweden has invited in hundreds of thousands if not millions of muslims with open arms. Between 500 and 600 of these muslims have gotten jobs in Sweden. The rest are content with collecting welfare and RAPING the lovely Swedish women while the cowardly socialist Swedish men cower in fear.

Agreed!!! From what I understand,,, you can't buy a handgun in Sweden at this time... because demand is so high. Who is buying them??? The Swedish women... in an attempt to protect themselves from the influx of rapists.

 

[Ima Luthier]

All of your elk likes to refer to the liberal in the same vain as irresponsible foolish riff raff individuals or groups. Can you define according to text book sources the origins or the right wing and left wing. or liberal bubbles as you know to call them. ?

awesome, our Elk are conservative, too! Too bad they make for tasty, tasty steaks and burgers!

 

[Ima Luthier]

Agreed!!! From what I understand,,, you can't buy a handgun in Sweden at this time... because demand is so high. Who is buying them??? The Swedish women... in an attempt to protect themselves from the influx of rapists.

let's hope the Swedish ladies get the proper training to "prevent the refugee driven population explosion"...

 

[cammerfe]

There's at least a slight difference between 'elk' and ilk...

KS

 

[Ima Luthier]

There's at least a slight difference between 'elk' and ilk...

KS

that was my own facetious way of pointing his error out...

 

[cammerfe]

I've often wondered what it is you use to screw up your head so bad. Surely it's something more than just tetrahydrocannabinol.

KS

 

[cammerfe]

I have an AB in Chemistry and a fair degree of recall. I didn't have to look up anything.

KS

 

[cammerfe]

Your belief (or not) is a matter of complete indifference to me.

KS

 

[cammerfe]

Regardless of the determined nay-sayers, outright liars, and dumb liberal socialists wait until his terms are done and see if the country is in better shape.

KS

 

[heyjewel]

Regardless of the determined nay-sayers, outright liars, and dumb liberal socialists wait until his terms are done and see if the country is in better shape.

KS

Country already is in better shape. Though the shameless children on the left are trying to block his every move and having some success. Country would be that much better still if they'd get out of his way.

 

[heyjewel]

Geez, Trump's supporters are hate spewing????
Apparently you haven't kept up with current events relating to the fine folks on your side. UC Berkeley to name JUST ONE. Well, actually more than once at that single venue. Stop hating on your fellow Americans and help make America great again instead of fighting to keep us on the road to the third world.

"Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see"
- John Lennon

 

[cammerfe]

Worm, as long as you really mean it about 'sitting back' and we don't have to look at your liberal-progressive theoretic drivel on a regular basis, I'll be happy to wait with you for what's ahead.

KS

 

[RigsLS]

What a Fn tit he was the other day, all over the news, caught shoving that French Prez out of the way so he can be the center of attention.

Make way, I need to be up front, I Trump all.

Embarrassing ... feel sorry for you guys. Least you don't have a pussy running the show like we do.

 

[cammerfe]

Not French. Some guy from a third-world country, who'd been part of the program for about 15 minutes, and didn't realize he was standing in the wrong spot. Of course, snowflakes such as yourself are wont to make a big deal by complaining about the Russian dressing on the salad that was served to him. Whinging ill becomes you.

KS

 

[RigsLS]

Snowflakes such as myself? .... bit of a cock your being right now, huh Cam?

Guess it was fake news, could have sworn I heard French Prez on Fox network. Regardless it was the shoving out of the way that was the point.

Which you clearly missed because you were too focused on how you could build a rebutal rather than agreement.

Good job Camm, how American of you!

EDIT - Correct, it was Dusko Markovic, the leader of Montenegro, a small Balkan nation of 600,000 attending its first summit as a NATO member after a nine-year accession process.

Glad you could snowflake that for me!

Another point for Camm.

 

[cammerfe]

Brand new reps from a country that has about the same number of inhabitants as are left in Detroit don't get to stand in the front row. It's well-established; that's how things are done. Perhaps a yutz such as yourself doesn't understand that displays of this sort are carefully arranged, so you embarrass yourself by making a fuss about the new guy's gaff.

KS

 

[RigsLS]

"OUTA MY WAY, I HAVE SECRETS TO DIVULGE" ... or I'll fire you!

 

[cammerfe]

The fellow was acting clueless. Such things are carefully staged. It has nothing to do with Trump or his attitude, and ALL to do with protocol. The whingeing that's gone on is just as silly as complaining because Trump likes Russian dressing on his food and trying to draw some sort of dark parallel thereto.

KS

 

[shagdrum]

flynn's gonna like jail.

Unlikely

except what trump causes himself. like obstruction of justice.

There was no obstruction of justice.

it's never the crime, it's the cover up.

I can agree with that, though there is no crime in Trump's case or that of his people. Trump is his own worst enemy and more likely to get himself in hot water by not keeping his mouth shut (or staying off twitter) than anything actually being found in the Russia manipulation kabuki dance.

clinton was impeached for lying, not for any crime committed.

Perjury.
Subornation of perjury.

 

[shagdrum]

sure there was. firing comey was obstruction.

Firing Comey was perfectly within his power to do, whatever his reasoning (Comey admitted as much). Trump, should he choose, is perfectly within his power to stop any and all investigations into Russia. Legally, this is not, in any way, obstruction of justice.

It is not enough to say the president is the chief executive. In our system, he is the only executive with constitutional power. (“The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America” —Article II, Section 1.) Every other executive-branch officer is not just subordinate to the president. These inferior officers do not have their own power. The power they exercise is the president’s power. They are mere delegates.

These subordinate executive officials include FBI agents and federal prosecutors. Every day, throughout the United States, these officials exercise executive discretion to shut down investigations or decline prosecutions. Very often, these are cases in which crimes have been committed and a prosecution would be viable.

In our system, it is not mandatory that a viable case be indicted and prosecuted. Instead, in each case, agents and prosecutors weigh the equities: the seriousness of the crime, including the harm to any victims, versus personal considerations relevant to the suspect — his history of criminality or positive contribution to society, whether other negative consequences have befallen him such that prosecution would be overkill, whether there are means other than the criminal law (such as civil suits or community service) that would adequately address the wrongdoing, etc. The Justice Department (of which the FBI is a component) decides, based on the totality of the circumstances, whether further investigation and prosecution are warranted.

In this, again, they are exercising the president’s power. In light of the fact that the president is their superior and the power is his, the president cannot have less discretion than a United States attorney or an FBI supervisor does in weighing the equities and deciding that a case should not be pursued. Charging discretion, moreover, is like the pardon power in this regard: It is a power of the executive that is unreviewable by the courts.​

And here:

Comey confirmed that under our Constitution, the president has the authority to direct the FBI to stop investigating any individual. I paraphrase, because the transcript is not yet available: the president can, in theory, decide who to investigate, who to stop investigating, who to prosecute and who not to prosecute. The president is the head of the unified executive branch of government, and the Justice Department and the FBI work under him and he may order them to do what he wishes.

As a matter of law, Comey is 100 percent correct. As I have long argued, and as Comey confirmed in his written statement, our history shows that many presidents—from Adams to Jefferson, to Lincoln, to Roosevelt, to Kennedy, to Bush 1, and to Obama – have directed the Justice Department with regard to ongoing investigations. The history is clear, the precedents are clear, the constitutional structure is clear, and common sense is clear.​

trumps worry of collusion

Again, there was no collusion. On this, I have FAR better sources than you could possibly have.

But ignoring that; Obama, Comey, Brennan, Clapper have all admitted that there is no evidence of collusion. Per Comey's testimony, there was never any criminal investigation (only investigations concerning national security, which are very different). Per Comey's testimony, Trump has never been under investigation.

 

[cammerfe]

Very well said. But it does no good to explain it, morning joe/'the worm' will continue to dither and wuzzle about it anyway. Those of their ilk haven't yet come to terms with having lost the election. Their self-righteousness/egos will sustain them for yet a while, before they fall flat on their faces.

KS

 

[shagdrum]

hrmwrm, you really need to look up the definition of "collusion".

Again, there was no collusion. Nothing even remotely illegal (here is the law, if you wanna look it up).

And my sources are still far better than yours on this.

didn't say it wasn't in trumps power to fire him shag. it's just looking at the reason for firing. it was to dump the trump/russia investigation. that's obstruction.

Legally, there was no obstruction. There can't be, per the Constitutional powers of the executive branch. The reason is irrelevant (to argue otherwise is to show you don't understand Article 2).

 

[cammerfe]

A back-'n'-forth in which 20% of our uranium is sold to Russia and then a hundred-million-dollar-plus 'donation' is given to the Clinton Foundation by the Russians---THAT'S a Russian connection. Yammering about a 20-minute meeting in which it immediately becomes very obvious that the stated purpose of the meeting is a prevarication by the Russians---that's a 'nothing-burger' offered as a whinge. Quit sniveling. Unless that's your entire purpose and you're not capable of anything else.

KS

 

[shagdrum]

apparently YOU don't understand the meaning. that's exactly what junior did. YOU need to read the meaning a little closer.

So are you really missing the point, or do you not grasp it?

Unless you are running with the completely harmless definition of collusion as “working together toward a common end”, there was not, in any way, collusion.

If you are going to construe private exchanging of info as collusion, then you are making any claim of illegal (or even unethical) activity a LOT harder to prove, as, under that understanding, the vast majority of times it is engaged in, collusion is a completely legitimate and respectable activity. Every time you exchange any information over private messaging, it would be “collusion”.

Show me a reasonable definition of collusion that would paint what Trump Jr. did as “collusion” in any unethical sense of the term.

when that email came through, he shouldn't have been saying I LOVE IT, he should have been thinking I"M REPORTING THIS TO THE FBI.

What was there to report? That someone had negative info on Hillary? Is that now a crime?

Put up or shut up. Show me, specifically, what laws were violated here. Collusion is only illegal in anti-trust instances to avoid cartels determining prices.

I have quoted actual legal experts (and I, personally, have had more training on the Constitution than most lawyers).

You have provided nothing but your notoriously biased, over-the-top perspective. No actual argument. No sources. No specific facts that back up your assertions.

And, no, wall-o’-texts don’t count as proof…or good faith.

Oh, do you realize how broad of a net you are casting when impugning anyone who doesn’t agree with the progressive/MSM mythmaking concerning Trump? Even people who might otherwise be on the same page as you in opposition to Trump’s policy views are turned off by the hysterics you try to push. I, for one, did not vote for Trump.

And, BTW, my sources are still better than your's on this matter.

 

[shagdrum]

What [Hillary] did is irrelevent.

Likely exposing 110 classified emails (36 that were “secret”, 8 of which were “top secret”) to hostile entities by illegally running a completely unprotected private server purely for political purposes, destroying emails/evidence when her dishonesty is exposed, and lying to the public about her crimes is completely irrelevant.

if you want her to go to jail for it, phone the proper authorities and make a complaint.

You mean the same authorities who instructed Comey to use politically preferential terminology when discussing the “not-an-investigation” in public?

The same authorities who actually added previously nonexistent clauses to laws so as to avoid recommending indictment?

The same authorities who saw no problem with a private meeting between the husband of the woman under “not-an-investigation” and the head of the DOJ?

The same authorities that saw no conflict of interest with Andrew McCabe (someone with political ties to the Clintons) heading the “not-an-investigation”?

The same authorities that severely hamstrung the “not-an-investigation” by refusing to convene a grand jury?

The same authorities that struck exceedingly favorable immunity agreements with key figures involving side deals guaranteeing that the FBI would not look at evidence from after a date 5 weeks before any possible justice obstructing activities occurred, and that the computers the evidence was on would be destroyed after the search.

Yes, I am sure those authorities will show complete impartiality, thoroughness, and integrity in conducting any further “non”-investigations into Hillary.