sheeeit

I hope the irony of Sean Hannity using HUD support to expand his real estate portfolio at taxpayer expense isn't lost on those who bemoan the existence of welfare queens. Rich people need welfare too. Not that any of you care, but the HUD program for multifamily is not, at all, a form of welfare. The fact that some of you do not even know what you are talking about is kind of funny. Also funny how the media can slant something and the usuals just eat it up. The HUD multifamily program is simply a loan program designed for multifamily. It is not designated to poor areas or underserved areas. If Hannity used it, then he paid hundreds of thousands in fees to HUD and is paying market interest on the debt. The fact that people think a program where the borrower pays hundreds of thousands of fees as well as market interest on a loan is welfare is awesome. If everyone would use this welfare then the US could retire its debt pretty quick because the HUD program is a net financial gain for the tax payers. And, Hannity is a tool.

Well she did testify to the HIC for 3 hours in Berlin. She has been very consistent that she has no ties to the Russian govt and that all they talked about was sanctions related to Magnitsky and adoptions. Rinat, who is a US citizen, has testified to Mueller. He has said that he had no knowledge of the meeting until the day of, and was asked to attend that day by Nataliya as they were working together in lobbying efforts for adoptions/Magnitsky. There could obviously be something there, but it seems very unlikely to me as Nataliya, Rinat, Trump Jr, Kush and Manafort have all told the exact same story. They could certainly all be lying but that would be very hard to prove. Obviously if there were extraneous notes by Manafort on the meeting at his residence then it would be helpful to the case. I think it is unlikely anything comes of that meeting that implicates the trump crew in a conspiracy/collusion. And I get that some people think Trump Jr saying "i love it" is enough to prove collusion. I disagree but I can see the point. If there had actually been any dirt on Hillary exchanged or if there had been even one single follow up with the parties involved then Im ight feel differently. And obviously, if they find some evidence/notes in Manaforts stuff then it could change.

Not particularly clever but there was an article several years ago where a random sampling of women rated pick up lines and the #1 was "Want to see my Harley".

Actually met him and drank with him. Was in Sacramento around 1989 or 1990. Was in college in the Bay area and was dating a gal from Sacramento. We were at her place and her sister worked at a hotel bar. We went down to see her late night and she was freaking out and said Andre was in a booth all alone and drinking heavily. We went to see him and he asked us to sit. There was no one else in the bar. His english was bad but he understood pretty well. I can attest that his hands were enormous. Never saw anything like it. He was drinking some French liqueur and was on bottle number 2 when we arrived and he finished the second one. Just kept pouring out huge shots and he gulped them down. When he stood up he did not seem like he was 7'4" or anything but I would guess about 6'9". We stayed maybe an hour. Not sure what to ask a guy like that so I asked a wrestling question and he did not want to talk about wrestling. Turns out he liked baseball and we talked about the Oakland As and Canseco. All I got.

Well when people suggested that it meant something when Comey said it, the reply was it is still very early and the investigation is ongoing. Which was a reasonable response. After an entire year, I have to believe the obstruction stuff has been fleshed out. There are only 3 or 4 people involved. One of which is the current deputy attorney general, Rosenstein, who is overseeing the investigation. I realize there can be a conspiracy involving multiple people. But this is not some crime scene with no suspects. We already know everyone involved and all of them, except Trump, have testified. You honestly think Rosenstein, who wrote the memo suggesting Comey be fired, could tell Trump that he was not a target of any investigation while there still being a chance that Trump is charged/accused/recommended for obstruction? Who else could be the target? Sessions? Rosenstein? And even if the Bloomberg story is made up bullshit, I still think it is hilarious that people think there will be a case for obstruction when the man who is overseeing the actual investigation of all things Trump/collusion/obstruction/mob ties/pee tapes etc, Rosenstein, wrote a memo that Comey should be fired a few days before Trump fired him.

Interesting. Could be bullshit from Trumps own people. Anonymous sources suck going both ways. But, if true, I wonder what this does to the supposed obstruction charges. I get the "subject" versus "target" semantics, although I believe that is a bit of wishful thinking, but it could be accurate that Rosenstein is being coy with Trump and his lawyers. But for obstruction, there can only be one target. Only trump could fire Comey right? In any investigation there has to be a target or supposed crime. I have never heard of anyone else in this deal being investigated for obstruction. Only trump. We shall see.

What an amazing thread. There is some serious stupidity and some serious assigning of beliefs going on. On the OP, horrible treatment of the men at Starbucks. If the facts are accurate as have been reported, the manager should not have the option to go to another store. She should be fired. Not sure I agree that the cops have much blame here. I certainly agree that cops have some discretion but only to a certain point. The cops certainly could have tried to work with the manager and men to work out a solution. But, if the manager says they are trespassing by not buying something (yes I realize that this may be selectively enforced or whatever but the cops can't make that distinction) then the cops do not really have a choice. They have to ask the men to leave. They can tell the men that they think the manager is a total whack job, racist white devil, but, legally, she can ask them to leave if they refuse to buy something. After the men refuse the police order, then they are going to get arrested. It was a shitty situation and the men got a very raw deal but I can't condemn the cops in this particular instance. There is an amazingly slippery slope for the public to give on scene cops the discretion to decide how to selectively enforce the law.

Lulz. Really? From the NSA? They can re-route international cell towers? You guys realize that Mueller can get about any info he wants. NSA, Nat Sec, Customs, IRS, phone companies, aviation records, hotel records, credit card records, bank records, etc. They can interview Cohen's receptionist, secretary, co workers, friends that may have texted or called him, neighbors, virtually anyone except, I assume his wife and kids. If Cohen disappeared for a few days and went all the way to prague, there is a record.

Perfect. Lawyer files motion in District Court that the allegations against Cohen in the Steele dossier are false. See that means it really is true. Lawyer says that the references to Cohen in the dossier are false. Twitter person gets reposted by saying "lawyer says entire dossier is debunked".

Of course he could have an additional passport. And the state dept would know because they issue them and, as a result, Mueller would know. I am not sure I agree that showing his passport doesn't prove much, but you guys were the ones making claims that he hadn't done anything. I do not know if I would consider McClatchy a "major news organization" but that is unimportant. I think Cohen is likely a sleazy guy but I do not think he is abjectly stupid. He has come out very, very strongly that he was never even in Prague. In 2018, if a person is under investigation by the FBI it is virtually impossible to conceal their whereabouts. Cohen knows that if he was, in fact, in Prague that it would be easily found out by investigators. You guys are so blind in your hope to get Trump on something that you suspend all objectivity and reason. You say a story like this warrants discussion and I agree. 20 people discuss it based on the assumption that it is true. 1 person discusses it on the assumption that it is not true and that person is labelled a troll, trumpkin etc. When challenged, you guys admit that it has not been proven public yet. So you say you want discussion but any discussion that it might not be true is met with childish, unhinged retorts. I agree that message board bets are dumb. But not as dumb as people labeling someone a troll for posting their opinion on the topic at hand and backing up that opinion with some evidence to support their opinion. That is basically the opposite of trolling. That is actually having a discussion versus a circle jerk. You guys abuse the aggies of stuff like this and yet you are just as bad. News agency says Mueller has proof that Cohen was in Prague based on anonymous sources. You guys dance gleefully and speculate all of the ways that Cohen will flip and that trump will go down. I point out that Cohen did, in fact, share his passport with a news agency. He was in fact in LA when he said he was. He said he was in NYC everyday in September. Presumably he was seen by people. I am sure he gets many texts and calls everyday like all of us which would be very easy for an investigator to check. I suggest that maybe the article is bullshit. Your response is like aggies. Burn the troll!!!

Lulz. Yes, it does seem crazy that Cohen would put this stuff out there at the time the actual accusation first came out. I am happy to make the bet, but not just with you. I have never heard of you. I will happily make it with Mojo, Pods, Hugo, Triple, wildcat09, derty etc.

I am certain he does. It is very hard to hide your location anymore.

I get it just fine. Apparently you do not get it. I am simply giving my personal opinion on what types of things I would be in favor of impeachment for. I realize that my opinion has no bearing on actual impeachment proceedings. I think a few of think yours does.

Solid thread

You guys can really be a beating sometimes. I am saying that I would fully support him being impeached if any of that stuff is proven.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/anthonycormier/trumps-lawyer-showed-you-the-cover-of-his-passport-heres?utm_term=.hgwpQ5JEwK#.esNWgVXAoB I honestly do not know if buzzfeed is a conservative lean or not. But Cohen, apparently, did give them his passport. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/michael-cohen-it-is-fake-news-meant-to-malign-mr-trump/512762/ I honestly do not know if the Atlantic is a conservative lean or not. But he says he was at USC and the USC coaches verified it. This is so typical of this whole saga. There will, of course, be phone records of Cohen's whereabouts everyday during the supposed time he was in Prague. Just another example of you guys swallowing news without even thinking. From most accounts, Cohen is probably a scumbag. This is not about Cohen. It is about the 1000th or so time that you guys take unsourced/anonymous claims as gospel. I will happily wager whatever any of you want on whether or not it is proved that Cohen was in Prague. I will take the side that he wasn't.

Good for Cohen. I thought we were talking about Hannity here. If it turns out that Hannity was using Cohen as an actual lawyer where he was paid and there was an actual thing involved, then I would agree that Hannity is a total liar and hypocrite.

The open minded one is back. I have ripped on Trump many times. I ripped him for firing Tillerson. I have called him juvenile and egotistical 100 times. I have said I hate his tweets. I have said the "wall" is stupid. I think he is a person without morals. He is likely hypocritical. All I have ever done that you guys claim makes me a trumpkin is that I do not think he collaborated with russia in the election. And, he was elected. In our country, it is not an impeachable offense to be immoral and childish. It is not an impeachable offense to exaggerate about the size of crowds or how many times he was on Time magazine cover. If he colluded with Russia. Impeach him. If he obstructed justice. Impeach him. If he laundered money. Impeach him. If not, then vote him out swiftly when his term is up. But for darn sure do not run a Hillary type again or he will win again. I think Bloomberg would be great but maybe too old.

It sort of depends on your definition of "his attorney". If a guy who never sent you a bill and that you never paid and has never represented you in any civil or criminal proceeding is considered "your lawyer" then maybe so. But only maybe, I am not sure it is relevant for a talking head radio show guy. Can no one in journalism not have sources that they are friendly with? People ask the lawyers on here to answer legal questions all of the time. Does that make them "your lawyer"?

I would say it depends. There have been plenty of people that have railed against the raid. You are purely speculating that Hannity had anything personal tied up in the raid. If we take Hannity at his word that he and cohen had a few calls over the years about real estate stuff and there were never any bills or payments or anything else then how would Hannity be "tied" up in the raid other than his name was on Cohen's client list? Do you agree that Hannity railing on the radio had exactly zero impact on any of the legal proceedings? What do you think the reaction would have been on this board and the general media if Hannity had said something like "I have known Cohen for years and have used him as an attorney a few times"? The reaction would be exactly like it is today. Like I said, IF Hannity is hiding something nefarious then he deserves scorn and ridicule and it would be the height of hypocrisy. I think hypocrisy is about the worst trait a person can have. I loathe it. Hannity does not have any bearing on my life in any way as I do not listen or watch him. If he is a hypocrite then fry his ass. I do not see it here.

I dont think I have ever seen hannity's tv show and have heard his radio gig a few times and, like pretty much everyone else, it was a total beating to listen to. I am having a hard time understanding the hoopla regarding transparency. Did Hannity have cohen on his show a bunch and not tell people he was Trump's lawyer? is it a problem that he may have used Cohen as a "source"? Don't all media/journalists have sources that they do not disclose? Are people making the jump to the conclusion that if hannnity knows cohen and used him for legal purposes that he, Hannity, can no longer have any opinions on Trump because cohen is trumps attorney? Obviously it seems many, many people in the media have "sources" within the FBI and inside Mueller's team because they keep attributing stories to them. Are they supposed to disclose them if they know them personally or have some sort of connection to them? I do not get the deep state analogy. Isnt the deep state stuff supposedly that people on the inside that have the ability to actually have a direct effect on things? people that are somehow directly involved in investigations and so forth. Hannity is just a blow hard tv and radio guy. How can he actually affect anything regarding any of the investigations? Do we think Mueller is affected in any way by what Hannity says? As for why Hannity kept the relationship secret the only answer you need is what is going on right now. Obviously this is a big deal if Hannity used Cohen to cover something up.

"I just don’t see how anyone can pass judgment on Comey during that whole fiasco when it’s very clear the public doesn’t have all the facts " I chuckled. I also think it is hilarious that a guy that had, what, 2 meetings and a few phone calls with someone can form such an elaborate opinion on his character. This is not to say Trump actually has any character, but Comey had less than 2 hours of interaction with him. Pure money grab coupled with an oversized ego and self aggrandization.

Wow. That really sucks. No wonder you have a harsh feeling for organized religion. I absolutely loathe people that act like that. Like some above said, just try and let it go. Try to remember that the religious stuff they say to you is about them and not you. Their religion sort of makes them reach out to you. And, of course, they love you. If someone wants to find hypocrisy and illogicalness then religion is a freaking gold mine. Religion can screw some people up and it can have a profound positive impact on others.

Crazy horny

solid