1. cammerfe

    cammerfe Dedicated LVC Member

    Messages:
    3,622
    Likes Received:
    164
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Metro Detroit
    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
     
  2. RigsLS

    RigsLS Dedicated LVC Member

    Messages:
    7,615
    Likes Received:
    1117
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2017
  3. hrmwrm

    hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

    Messages:
    1,392
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Location:
    Alberta
    to quote trump, bigly.
     
  4. hrmwrm

    hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

    Messages:
    1,392
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Location:
    Alberta
    he was standing right where he should have been til some egotistical pompous oompa loompa demanding attention shoved him out of the way.
    too bad af1 didn't do a malaysian 370 going to the middle east.
     
  5. cammerfe

    cammerfe Dedicated LVC Member

    Messages:
    3,622
    Likes Received:
    164
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Location:
    Metro Detroit
    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
     
  6. RigsLS

    RigsLS Dedicated LVC Member

    Messages:
    7,615
    Likes Received:
    1117
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    "OUTA MY WAY, I HAVE SECRETS TO DIVULGE" ... or I'll fire you!
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • cammerfe

      cammerfe Dedicated LVC Member

      Messages:
      3,622
      Likes Received:
      164
      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2007
      Location:
      Metro Detroit
      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
       
    • hrmwrm

      hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

      Messages:
      1,392
      Likes Received:
      1
      Joined:
      Aug 26, 2007
      Location:
      Alberta
      flynn's gonna like jail. he's the cause of trumps woes. except what trump causes himself. like obstruction of justice. people under investigation running your campaign. being putin's bitch.
      it's never the crime, it's the cover up.
      clinton was impeached for lying, not for any crime commited.
      so, in trumps case. pick one. any one.
       
    • shagdrum

      shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

      Messages:
      6,559
      Likes Received:
      33
      Joined:
      Aug 30, 2005
      Location:
      Topeka
      Unlikely
      There was no obstruction of justice.

      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.

      Perjury.
      Subornation of perjury.
       
    • hrmwrm

      hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

      Messages:
      1,392
      Likes Received:
      1
      Joined:
      Aug 26, 2007
      Location:
      Alberta
      sure there was. firing comey was obstruction. trump even admitted it. he fired comey thinking the whole russia thing would disappear. SURPRISE.
      now his troubles are deeper. i'm just waiting til they get to the chapter with felix sater. that's where mueller is headed now.he's following the money.
      trumps worry of collusion is but an ice cube compared to the berg being dug up.
       
    • shagdrum

      shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

      Messages:
      6,559
      Likes Received:
      33
      Joined:
      Aug 30, 2005
      Location:
      Topeka
      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.
      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

      cammerfe Dedicated LVC Member

      Messages:
      3,622
      Likes Received:
      164
      Joined:
      Oct 27, 2007
      Location:
      Metro Detroit
      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
       
      Last edited: Jun 30, 2017
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • hrmwrm

        hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

        Messages:
        1,392
        Likes Received:
        1
        Joined:
        Aug 26, 2007
        Location:
        Alberta
        hey, hows that russian connection denial going. so, don jr is the next candidate on who's going to jail.
        sorry, you got me confused with that bad tempered oompa loompa you elected. russian connection denial is falling flat.

        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. but i don't think that's his biggest worry anymore.
        doubt that, or you'd have seen delerium tremens junior riding in with a BIG collusion. you know, the one that said we are the russian govenment and we want to help your dad, and he said sure. what a fuckin idiot.
        and dt senior is too fuckin ignorant to realize just what his son has done. once the meeting was made, IT WAS COLLUSION. (although there are whispers of treason.:cool:)
        it's like trying to hire somebody for murder. even if the target never dies, doesn't mean a crime hasn't been committed. people go to jail for conspiracy all the time.
        so, where does it end. do you see president ryan in the future?:D end of the year at this rate.
        i'd put a lot of links, but i'm sure you know the story and where the internet is to know what's going on.
        i'll just leave you guys waving your little trump flags. hope you had a happy fourth, i had a happy first.:D
         
      • shagdrum

        shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

        Messages:
        6,559
        Likes Received:
        33
        Joined:
        Aug 30, 2005
        Location:
        Topeka
        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.

        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).
         
        Last edited: Jul 13, 2017
      • cammerfe

        cammerfe Dedicated LVC Member

        Messages:
        3,622
        Likes Received:
        164
        Joined:
        Oct 27, 2007
        Location:
        Metro Detroit
        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
         
        • Like Like x 1
        • hrmwrm

          hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          1,392
          Likes Received:
          1
          Joined:
          Aug 26, 2007
          Location:
          Alberta
          apparently YOU don't understand the meaning. that's exactly what junior did. YOU need to read the meaning a little closer.
          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.
          it's collusion shag. black and white collusion. but you'll defend the oompa loompa family.
          if chelsea got a similar email, you crazy fuckers would be screamin lock her up all over again. fossten would probably return for that one even. live in your little world of lies.
          you'll continue to defend the indefensible.
           
        • hrmwrm

          hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          1,392
          Likes Received:
          1
          Joined:
          Aug 26, 2007
          Location:
          Alberta
          ks, HILLARY IS NOT PRESIDENT. report her to the police if your so inclined. what she did is irrelevent. we are talikng trump here.
          if you want to talk hillary, start a new thread. if you want her to go to jail for it, phone the proper authorities and make a complaint. :rolleyes:
          i'm sure they'll listen to you.
          next you'll be like trump team trying to blame the secret service. except they weren't watching him then.
          amazing the ignorance there is in defense of trump.
           
        • shagdrum

          shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          6,559
          Likes Received:
          33
          Joined:
          Aug 30, 2005
          Location:
          Topeka
          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.

          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. ;)
           
          Last edited: Jul 17, 2017
        • shagdrum

          shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          6,559
          Likes Received:
          33
          Joined:
          Aug 30, 2005
          Location:
          Topeka
          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.

          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.
           
        • cammerfe

          cammerfe Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          3,622
          Likes Received:
          164
          Joined:
          Oct 27, 2007
          Location:
          Metro Detroit
          Well said!

          KS
           
        • hrmwrm

          hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          1,392
          Likes Received:
          1
          Joined:
          Aug 26, 2007
          Location:
          Alberta
          hillary's not president. don't fuckin care. tell a cop who might. hell, tell mueller. :rolleyes: i'm not gonna argue either way about her. title of this thread is trump.
          last i checked, russia is still a foreign ENEMY. but hey, you can do a steve bannon on trump and defend him. i understand your lack of ethics. i've seen it many times through the years here. that's more than collusion, it borders on treason.
          even the email sent to kushner said russia, hillary, important.
          well, we'll just see what the grand jury digs up now. maybe we'll finally find out about felix sater and who signed what in a multi million dollar tax fraud. :eek:
          it's just a matter of time. (where's the finger smiley):D
           
        • shagdrum

          shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          6,559
          Likes Received:
          33
          Joined:
          Aug 30, 2005
          Location:
          Topeka
          :rolleyes:I’m so surprised you have zero interest in discussing the double standards you are imposing or in defending your cheap excuse of "going to the proper authorities" on Clinton:rolleyes:

          Apparently, you missed the point implicit in the comparison that the authorities are corrupt and untrustworthy. As long as they are looking to string up the guy you hate, that is all that matters. Right?

          Just because the Left and has hard on to MAKE Russia the enemy doesn’t mean they actually ARE the enemy. Apparently you need reminding that progressive political rhetoric is not necessarily truth.

          In fact, looking at the tensions between us in the past few years, WE are the aggressors, if anything. Or can you explain the expansion of NATO (or even it’s unnecessary continued existance).

          Put up or shut up. Show me HOW this is anywhere NEAR “treason”. Hell, make the case for it even being collusion. I have given you the relevant laws on collusion, you have (unsurprisingly) failed to connect the dots on that one. As usual you are all bluster and mindless progressive talking points. No substance.

          Here is the relevant portion on treason from Article III:

          Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

          Again, Russia is NOT our enemy. Not yet, despite progressive/Deep State/Neocon efforts to MAKE it such.

          You really need to step away from the punch bowl on this. I know you love to let the progressive propagandists do your thinking for you, but they are leading you into VERY dangerous territory. If the Deep State is allowed a veto on elections (which is what they are going for) we cease to be, in any way, a representative system of governance. Just because their interests and yours seem to align for the moment doesn’t mean they always will. Just look at the Iraq War and how they railroaded us into that (or are you supporting that now).

          Glenn Greenwald is hardly a Trump fan, but he is one of the few people on the Left who have not only demonstrated an ability to think for themselves, but to see the bigger picture as well:

          No matter how much of a threat one regards Trump as being, there really are other major threats to U.S. democracy and important political values. It’s hard, for instance, to imagine any group that has done more harm, and ushered in more evil, than the Bush-era neocons with whom Democrats are now openly aligning. And who has brought more death, and suffering, and tyranny to the world over the last six decades than the U.S. National Security State?


          In terms of some of the popular terms that are often thrown around these days – such as “authoritarianism” and “democratic norms” and “U.S. traditions” – it’s hard to imagine many things that would pose a greater threat to all of that than empowering the National Security State (what, before Trump, has long been called the Deep State) to exert precisely the power that is supposed to be reserved exclusively for elected officials. In sum, Trump opponents should be careful of what they wish for, as it might come true.

          And finally, as I have stated numerous times, my sources on this are FAR better than yours. As in, your sources are speculating based on next to no information relative to my sources.
           
          Last edited: Aug 7, 2017
        • RigsLS

          RigsLS Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          7,615
          Likes Received:
          1117
          Joined:
          Mar 10, 2012
          Just got back from a trip down to SC and back up ... Yup, still tons of back road US roadways littered with poor housing, thugs and vacant employment towns. Despite not having run US loads in over two years, it still to date continues to reminds me of that "Sandford & Son" show. Can really see that "Making America Great Again" plan in action.

          Here's the ironic thing about it all. I come down to the Carolina's with a load of manufactured textile product, to only return back up to Canada with a load of raw bulk US cotton ... ain't that a bitch of a Tangerine Terror plan huh?


          CONFESSION :: "I did not declare" the found watermelon I took from a readily available pile along HWY US-1 to Lugoff SC." ... it was, however, made in America and very delicious. Free from taxes, tariff and pay duty cash-me-now grabs also. :p



          .
           
        • hrmwrm

          hrmwrm Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          1,392
          Likes Received:
          1
          Joined:
          Aug 26, 2007
          Location:
          Alberta
          Last edited: Aug 17, 2017
        • shagdrum

          shagdrum Dedicated LVC Member

          Messages:
          6,559
          Likes Received:
          33
          Joined:
          Aug 30, 2005
          Location:
          Topeka
          giphy.gif
           

        Share This Page