August 10, 20224 yr 1 minute ago, VanHammersly said: The funny thing is that if you take this statement by itself, you sound like the far left. Pretty much word for word. They believe laws are applied unevenly and there's no accountability for the rich and powerful. The difference is that, of course, your solution to these problems concerning corruption is for Donald F'ing Trump to face no consequences for his crimes. It's all so transparently disengenuous, it's hilarious. Why should I as a republican play by the rules when the word of a democrat is as worthless as a booger out of my ass
August 10, 20224 yr 2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Yes because I know if I agree to apply the law against Trump today, you filthy democrat scum will never hold up your end of the bargain tomorrow you know it doesn't matter whether you agree or not, right?
August 10, 20224 yr 4 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: I was just told to avoid talking about what Hillary did 5 years ago but now you are talking about things Trump may have done early in his life Yes because I know if I agree to apply the law against Trump today, you filthy democrat scum will never hold up your end of the bargain tomorrow
August 10, 20224 yr 1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Why should I as a republican play by the rules when the word of a democrat is as worthless as a booger out of my ass You're a nobody, just like the rest of us on here dude (except Vikas, of course). We all have to play by the rules (except Vikas, of course).
August 10, 20224 yr 7 minutes ago, Dave Moss said: From the article - If this is true then I have to ask what in the world they were thinking was going to happen. It was super obvious. Quote The effort to keep the raid low-key failed: instead, it prompted a furious response from GOP leaders and Trump supporters. "What a spectacular backfire," says the Justice official. "I know that there is much speculation out there that this is political persecution, but it is really the best and the worst of the bureaucracy in action," the official says. "They wanted to punctuate the fact that this was a routine law enforcement action, stripped of any political overtones, and yet [they] got exactly the opposite." Both senior government officials say the raid was scheduled with no political motive, the FBI solely intent on recovering highly classified documents that were illegally removed from the White House. Preparations to conduct such an operation began weeks ago, but in planning the date and time, the FBI Miami Field Office and Washington headquarters were focused on the former president's scheduled return to Florida from his residences in New York and New Jersey. "They were seeking to avoid any media circus," says the second source, a senior intelligence official who was briefed on the investigation and the operation. "So even though everything made sense bureaucratically and the FBI feared that the documents might be destroyed, they also created the very firestorm they sought to avoid, in ignoring the fallout." Overall, the article is a good summary of the situation as we know it so far. One tidbit that the article asserts is that one of Trump's attorneys was present for the entire operation contrary to what Trump has asserted. The best part of this entire thing is if Trump is convicted and jailed it will be directly as a result of a law that he himself signed. Others in here have noted that already but it is worth mentioning and laughing at again and again. The article also says Garland was aware of but did not approve the operation as he was not inline to do so. Naturally, he could have stopped it though so I'd consider that an approval in any case.
August 10, 20224 yr 8 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: I was just told to avoid talking about what Hillary did 5 years ago but now you are talking about things Trump may have done early in his life His whole life. The thread is about the FBI raiding Trump, not Clinton you nitwit. We don't really know why he was raided to begin with, and there are literally tons of guesses one can make.
August 10, 20224 yr 29 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Whatever the case may be, or whoever signed whatever law, all laws ought to be enforced against everyone. Today Trump may have violated law #1. Tomorrow Hillary may violate law #2. I am for either putting them both in prison or putting neither of them in prison would be my secondary preference But I am vehemently against putting only Trump in prison Why? Trump changed the law to be a felony. His choice. He is the FIRST former president it would be possible to charge with this now felony, law. Why do you insist somebody else be charged with a crime before Trump? This makes zero sense. You really are a lunatic, aren't you?
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, Toastrel said: Why? Trump changed the law to be a felony. His choice. He is the FIRST former president it would be possible to charge with this law. Why do you insist somebody else be charged with a crime before Trump? This makes zero sense. You really are a lunatic, aren't you? I told you why. You must be Chinese. No English for you
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said: I told you why. You must be Chinese. No English for you No, you vomited up chunky word stew with nothing resembling a point, other than, you can't prosecute Trump for a crime unless you prosecute Hillary first.
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, Toastrel said: No, you vomited up chunky word stew with nothing resembling a point, other than, you can't prosecute Trump for a crime unless you prosecute Hillary first. if hillary is charged with a crime, convicted, & thrown in prison...are we supposed to civil war?
August 10, 20224 yr 1 minute ago, mr_hunt said: if hillary is charged with a crime, convicted, & thrown in prison...are we supposed to civil war? You need to be 100% committed Hunt
August 10, 20224 yr 26 minutes ago, Dave Moss said: Oh... Quote The grand jury concluded that there had been a violation of the law, according to the Justice Department source.
August 10, 20224 yr 8 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: From the article - If this is true then I have to ask what in the world they were thinking was going to happen. It was super obvious. Overall, the article is a good summary of the situation as we know it so far. One tidbit that the article asserts is that one of Trump's attorneys was present for the entire operation contrary to what Trump has asserted. The best part of this entire thing is if Trump is convicted and jailed it will be directly as a result of a law that he himself signed. Others in here have noted that already but it is worth mentioning and laughing at again and again. The article also says Garland was aware of but did not approve the operation as he was not inline to do so. Naturally, he could have stopped it though so I'd consider that an approval in any case. Well, if you believe that Trump got elected in part because of the behavior of Washington bureaucrats then this makes a lot of sense.
August 10, 20224 yr 3 minutes ago, Toastrel said: No, you vomited up chunky word stew with nothing resembling a point, other than, you can't prosecute Trump for a crime unless you prosecute Hillary first. Oh so you did understand, good
August 10, 20224 yr 26 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Because for a very long time, about at least 100 years now, laws haven’t been applied evenly and consistently, which is why we have $30T in debt and military bases in over 100 countries, Guantanamo prisons, torture, executive executions of American citizens by drone strike…I could go on and on and on Trump is my lesser of evils here. I will settle for Trump unless we can come to a clear understanding of the federal abuses committed by the regime in Washington DC for decades This is what you are saying with a different scenario. I could kill one of your family members, but should only be jailed for it if OJ is also jailed for the murders he committed, so that the laws are applied evenly and consistently.
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, DrPhilly said: You need to be 100% committed Hunt no mental institution could hold me!
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, DrPhilly said: You need to be 100% committed Hunt You gotta lock and load. You can’t be going off half-cocked.
August 10, 20224 yr 1 minute ago, downundermike said: This is what you are saying with a different scenario. I could kill one of your family members, but should only be jailed for it if OJ is also jailed for the murders he committed, so that the laws are applied equallly to everyone. This is what you’re saying with a different scenario. Today I want to throw one of your family members in jail, and I don’t want to have to make any binding promises that my family members would face the same punishment if they committed the same acts in the future
August 10, 20224 yr 39 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: Whatever the case may be, or whoever signed whatever law, all laws ought to be enforced against everyone. Today Trump may have violated law #1. Tomorrow Hillary may violate law #2. I am for either putting them both in prison or putting neither of them in prison would be my secondary preference But I am vehemently against putting only Trump in prison Wait wait wait... Are you advocating that we go back and imprison people for breaking a law that was written AFTER the fact?
August 10, 20224 yr Guys -- either stop feeding the troll, or go all the way and start asking about the NWO, the World Trade Center, the shape of the earth, etc. Stop half arseing it.
August 10, 20224 yr 4 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said: This is what you’re saying with a different scenario. Today I want to throw one of your family members in jail, and I don’t want to have to make any binding promises that my family members would face the same punishment if they committed the same acts in the future No one said that. All law breakers should be punished if crimes are proven. But, you keep referencing the past, Hillary, the last 100 years, which are all before the crime that Trump himself signed into law.
August 10, 20224 yr And the insider has to be Meadows, right? There was a story like a week ago that Trump's lawyers told him to cut off communication with Meadows. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-ignoring-advice-stop-talking-current-former-aides-meadows-cnn-2022-8
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, vikas83 said: Guys -- either stop feeding the troll, or go all the way and start asking about the NWO, the World Trade Center, the shape of the earth, etc. Stop half arseing it.
August 10, 20224 yr 8 minutes ago, Dave Moss said: You gotta lock and load. You can’t be going off half-cocked. I read somewhere that some of the Trump cooks have been using that term now as some sort of "get ready" thingy. Maybe Kz stole it from here and inserted it into their banter. I'm going to have to go to something else.
August 10, 20224 yr Just now, vikas83 said: And the insider has to be Meadows, right? There was a story like a week ago that Trump's lawyers told him to cut off communication with Meadows. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-ignoring-advice-stop-talking-current-former-aides-meadows-cnn-2022-8 Doesn't seem as likely that Meadows would've flipped, at least not yet. My money's still on Cipollone.
Create an account or sign in to comment