June 15, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, VanHammersly said: Ok. Did it. So, your position is that people shouldn't bring up Trump in the Trump thread? And remember, be as brief, vague and non-committal as possible in your response. Just now, Mike030270 said: No. You failed lol
June 15, 20232 yr Just now, Mike030270 said: Why did you jump in this? It's a message board, I wasn't aware you guys were having a private conversation. Why can't you answer the question?
June 15, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, VanHammersly said: It's pretty simple but you don't understand and that's fine. It's not that big of a deal
June 15, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: It's a message board, I wasn't aware you guys were having a private conversation. Why can't you answer the question? Curiosity but it faded. Don't care anymore
June 15, 20232 yr Mike's desperately trying to join the other two when it comes to saying dumb things and then backpedaling immediately when called on it
June 15, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, Paul852 said: Again, WHY did he want to keep these documents so badly? Simple -- because he has the emotional and intellectual capacity of a toddler. So if you tell him to do something, he just will scream NO. Don't overthink it -- he's just an imbecile.
June 15, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, we_gotta_believe said: Mike's desperately trying to join the other two when it comes to saying dumb things and then backpedaling immediately when called on it Oh F off. I said it was rich having memes with Hillary considering all the crap she was doing. The whole don't throw stones You 2 jumped in but didn't understand. I didn't feel like explaining it. Get over it ffs
June 15, 20232 yr 18 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: Oh F off. I said it was rich having memes with Hillary considering all the crap she was doing. The whole don't throw stones You 2 jumped in but didn't understand. I didn't feel like explaining it. Get over it ffs I understood perfectly fine. There was nothing wrong with your initial post about Hillary. It was your response accusing someone else of whataboutism, in a trump thread, when the subject of the meme is literally trump himself. You could've just chose to laugh it off and say my bad but you dug your heels in and tried to act like we're the stupid ones who can't follow along. The reason why you can't answer what the meme is about is because you finally realized you are guilty of the very thing you accused someone else of doing. There's a word for that. Look bud, you're an alright guy and all, but you choose some really weird hills to die on..
June 15, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, Mike030270 said: Lol the Hillary memes are rich considering her whole thing
June 15, 20232 yr Hillary is one of the most scrutinized politicians in the history of the country. Her every action and inaction was picked over by a hostile Republican congress for pretty much her entire tenure as Secretary of State. The entire Clinton family was investigated for years by a special prosecutor in Ken Starr whose near unrestricted latitude in investigating the Clintons caused congress to pass a law limiting the power of a special prosecutors - limitations that Trump greatly benefited from when the scope of Mueller's investigations were carefully restricted. And of course most recently we had a president who eagerly encouraged his DoJ to investigate political rivals, and who doubtlessly devoted some of that time to Hillary. I have a very hard time believing that after all that scrutiny from across the political world, that Hillary is guilty of any of the things she's been accused of. It's very easy to make baseless accusations, doubly so when some sort of specious but ultimately dubious arguments are made justifying them. Proving someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is much harder. It would appear that regarding Trump, they absolutely have the evidence to prove he broke the law repeatedly and flagrantly.
June 15, 20232 yr 31 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: Why did you jump in this? he's doing his best mikemack impression
June 15, 20232 yr 24 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: I didn't feel like explaining it. That should be your sig
June 15, 20232 yr 25 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: Oh F off. I said it was rich having memes with Hillary considering all the crap she was doing. The whole don't throw stones You 2 jumped in but didn't understand. I didn't feel like explaining it. Get over it ffs
June 15, 20232 yr 6 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Hillary is one of the most scrutinized politicians in the history of the country. Her every action and inaction was picked over by a hostile Republican congress for pretty much her entire tenure as Secretary of State. The entire Clinton family was investigated for years by a special prosecutor in Ken Starr whose near unrestricted latitude in investigating the Clintons caused congress to pass a law limiting the power of a special prosecutors - limitations that Trump greatly benefited from when the scope of Mueller's investigations were carefully restricted. And of course most recently we had a president who eagerly encouraged his DoJ to investigate political rivals, and who doubtlessly devoted some of that time to Hillary. I have a very hard time believing that after all that scrutiny from across the political world, that Hillary is guilty of any of the things she's been accused of. It's very easy to make baseless accusations, doubly so when some sort of specious but ultimately dubious arguments are made justifying them. Proving someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is much harder. It would appear that regarding Trump, they absolutely have the evidence to prove he broke the law repeatedly and flagrantly. Yeah, but what if we're all overlooking a vast global conspiracy that only a handful of hillbillies who dropped out of their GED program can figure out?
June 15, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, Dave Moss said: Btw, it makes sense that the NY and Georgia cases will be put on the back burner. Federal cases take precedence over state ones. Federal crimes also involve longer sentences fwiw As we've heard from many in here multiple times, all the NY case did was put Trump's face on the news and money in his pocket.
June 15, 20232 yr It would be the best thing ever if the Repubs would lead a serious prosecution against Trump with the aim to string him up forever. Alas, that just isn't going to happen. Nice idea Ben. Try again please.
June 15, 20232 yr 25 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: As we've heard from many in here multiple times, all the NY case did was put Trump's face on the news and money in his pocket. Let’s flip it around though. I can see how being prosecuted by the feds instead of a state might be advantageous to Trump politically.
June 15, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, Dave Moss said: Let’s flip it around though. I can see how being prosecuted by the feds instead of a state might be advantageous to Trump politically. The difference is that he faces a real risk with the feds at ending up doing real time in jail. Also, I see no needle movement in any case in the general.
June 15, 20232 yr 43 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: It would be the best thing ever if the Repubs would lead a serious prosecution against Trump with the aim to string him up forever. Alas, that just isn't going to happen. Nice idea Ben. Try again please. Speaking of dreaming, I was thinking last night we may be approaching an opportune time for a serious establishment Republican candidate to enter the arena (if there is such a thing). Chris Christie has the right idea IMO of going directly after Trump and his nonsense, but he's polling at 2% and will never have enough widespread appeal as a contender. Pence will never break with Trump enough, Haley is still a sycophant, and DeSantis is a disturbingly bad candidate with objectionable views. If Judge Cannon were to recuse herself, and this trial got off the ground in an expeditious timeframe -- I could see quite a few Republicans begin to rally around someone like Romney or Paul Ryan -- not sure there's a downside for either of them politically to jump in. Paul Ryan is 53, so he's still 15-20 years younger than most successful Republican nominees. He may prefer to wait for 2040.
June 15, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, Alphagrand said: Speaking of dreaming, I was thinking last night we may be approaching an opportune time for a serious establishment Republican candidate to enter the arena (if there is such a thing). Chris Christie has the right idea IMO of going directly after Trump and his nonsense, but he's polling at 2% and will never have enough widespread appeal as a contender. Pence will never break with Trump enough, Haley is still a sycophant, and DeSantis is a disturbingly bad candidate with objectionable views. If Judge Cannon were to recuse herself, and this trial got off the ground in an expeditious timeframe -- I could see quite a few Republicans begin to rally around someone like Romney or Paul Ryan -- not sure there's a downside for either of them politically to jump in. Paul Ryan is 53, so he's still 15-20 years younger than most successful Republican nominees. He may prefer to wait for 2040. I think it is too late. Sure hope I'm wrong.
June 15, 20232 yr 8 minutes ago, Alphagrand said: Speaking of dreaming, I was thinking last night we may be approaching an opportune time for a serious establishment Republican candidate to enter the arena (if there is such a thing). Chris Christie has the right idea IMO of going directly after Trump and his nonsense, but he's polling at 2% and will never have enough widespread appeal as a contender. Pence will never break with Trump enough, Haley is still a sycophant, and DeSantis is a disturbingly bad candidate with objectionable views. If Judge Cannon were to recuse herself, and this trial got off the ground in an expeditious timeframe -- I could see quite a few Republicans begin to rally around someone like Romney or Paul Ryan -- not sure there's a downside for either of them politically to jump in. Paul Ryan is 53, so he's still 15-20 years younger than most successful Republican nominees. He may prefer to wait for 2040. I honestly think Christie's a better candidate than Ryan or Romney. He's a much more natural politician. Romney's wooden and Ryan's a policy wonk which never goes over well. I don't think Christie has much of a chance, but if Trump were to have a coronary, he'd have as strong of a chance as anyone, aside from maybe DeSantis (though I'm not sold on DeSantis's weird awkwardness eventually biting even if he were the front runner).
June 15, 20232 yr 12 minutes ago, Alphagrand said: Speaking of dreaming, I was thinking last night we may be approaching an opportune time for a serious establishment Republican candidate to enter the arena (if there is such a thing). Chris Christie has the right idea IMO of going directly after Trump and his nonsense, but he's polling at 2% and will never have enough widespread appeal as a contender. Pence will never break with Trump enough, Haley is still a sycophant, and DeSantis is a disturbingly bad candidate with objectionable views. If Judge Cannon were to recuse herself, and this trial got off the ground in an expeditious timeframe -- I could see quite a few Republicans begin to rally around someone like Romney or Paul Ryan -- not sure there's a downside for either of them politically to jump in. Paul Ryan is 53, so he's still 15-20 years younger than most successful Republican nominees. He may prefer to wait for 2040. Trump, and his cult followers, will destroy the GOP before letting somebody else take the nomination.
June 15, 20232 yr i think right now, christie is the best chance. the more he keeps talking the more his numbers will rise. will it be enough ? probably not because the GOP voting base is full of dipsheets that fall for trump's BS. romney had his chance, that ship sailed and it sunk. ryan, he just isn't likeable IMO, but maybe im in the minority on that.
Create an account or sign in to comment