Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, UTGrad98 said:

I didnt know how I would react to the conclusion today but I have to honestly say when I read the headlines my first reaction was relief. And that is speaking as a moderate Dem. Im not sure how the country would have handled it had this report concluded Trump colluded with Russia. That said, if you are pissed off, then fucking vote him out of office in 2020. 

If he colluded, fucking impeach his ass. I have no allegiance to him, and never will to anyone when it comes to a choice between country, and a person who'd sell it out for their own gain.  

I think it's important for the American people to see what's there or not there, especially considering he'll probably be running a second time

Edited by Onboard 2.0
  • Like 1
Posted
In other words, "focus on real shit people". 

You know that doesn’t work, either.

Hell, you don’t. You’re kind of the perfect answer. “Both sides,” “I don’t like the guy,” but “defend trump as often as possible.”

There’s never been any denying the fact that the man is magic Teflon. Flaws that - even one of them - have brought down candidates before, don’t matter. You think policy matters? Bullshit. All that matters is the cult. Everything that follows is validated, because cult.

And so it goes. I said he’d win the presidency. I’ve said he’ll be re-elected. I’m betting that I end up batting 1.000 on those counts.
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Well triple is ready to start the Barr conspiracy thread...

He's doing his job I suppose. It shouldn't end there.

Interesting comments from Jay Sekulow just now - they did not and will not request DOJ provide a full copy of the Mueller report. 

There's going to be an all out effort to wall it off and not talk about it.

Posted

A billion pages and one website ago I said Trump will get nailed on RICO charges in NY.  I really don’t see that shit changing.  

There was way too much gray for anything solid on Mueller’s report to nail Trump - but let’s not forget all those who did get convicted around him.  Russia duped the country, Trump included.  He was an unwitting participant from the looks of it.  

Time to move on - of course the media will continue to milk this and nobody will move on.  

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Yes. You did. I even subsequently brought it up, offering you a chance to perhaps clarify your accusation while you were railing on the media getting it wrong, only to silence.

I believe I just did respond to that charge. The MAGA hatted kid was on the receiving end of assault, not the other way around as a gleeful media originally reported.  

How's that for a response ?

Posted
Just now, williemackgarza said:

No collusion.
Who knows on obstruction.
How can he obstruct an an investigation that proved he didnt collude?
Imean I know how, but isnt it fucking ridiculous?
I think thats why mueller left it open ended.

Generally, obstruction charges are laid when it is discovered that a person questioned in an investigation, other than a suspect, has lied to the investigating officers. However, in most common law jurisdictions, the right to remain silent can be used to allow any person questioned by police merely to deny answering questions posed by an investigator without giving any reason for doing so. (In such a case, the investigators may subpoenathe witness to give testimony under oath in court, though the witness may then exercise their rights, for example in the Fifth Amendment, if they believe their answer may serve to incriminate themselves.) If the person willfully and knowingly tried to protect a suspect (such as by providing a false alibi) or to hide from investigation of their own activities (such as to hide their involvement in another crime), this may leave them liable to prosecution. Obstruction charges can also be laid if a person alters, destroys, or conceals physical evidence.[1] Obstruction charges may also be laid in unique situations such as refusal to aid a police officer, escape through voluntary action of an officer and refusing to assist prison officers in arresting escaped convicts.

Obstruction can include crimes committed by judges, prosecutors, attorneys general, and elected officials in general. It is misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance in the conduct of the office. Most commonly it is prosecuted as a crime for perjury by a non governmental official primarily because of prosecutorial discretion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice

Posted
5 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Kiss just need to be banned, it's obviously another ADHD sock.

Pretty much everyone else is being reasonable except the usual trolls

Yeah he's trolling, but to see posters (who were salivating at the report to say he did it) say delete or lock this thread is funny.

Posted
2 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

2 years spent on this nonsense and the conclusion is no collusion? 2020 might be a landslide if the GOP plays their cards correctly.

Yeah, that's a strategy that could fall on deaf ears.They need too capture the middle of the road voters, and complaining about the other side usually doesn't work with the undecided in a positive way.  

Posted
7 minutes ago, Jim Tom Pinch said:

The Lib Trash in Washington played right into Putin’s hands with their insane ravings over the last two years and did more damage to American government and our trust in it than anything they could fabricate about a Trump. 

Agents of Russian intelligence services feed fantastical collusion narrative to ex British intelligence officer, who is being funded by American political interests to generate opposition research.  This Russian generated narrative is inserted into the US intelligence community and ultimately serves as the basis for initiating surveillance against an individual associated with an American Presidential campaign, cover provided by an unconstitutional and secretive domestic surveillance program with no transparency nor oversight.  After the unfathomable result of a contentious American election, influenced in large part by the results of a Russian intelligence operation that manipulated the actions of the Director of the FBI in the handling of an investigation into one of the American candidates for President, firing of same said Director evolves into a social media conspiracy circus that stokes political divisions and broadly undermines American faith in their government institutions. Spooks literally wipe their ass with the Constitution and damage our democracy for generations, perhaps irrevocably. Active measures indeed. 

  • Like 5
Posted

BrothaHorn longcat’d it, but Matt Taibbi, known right wing zealot (sarcasm), had a good column here re: media role in RussiaGate NONSENSE. 

 

  • Like 5
Posted
7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


You know that doesn’t work, either.

Hell, you don’t. You’re kind of the perfect answer. “Both sides,” “I don’t like the guy,” but “defend trump as often as possible.”

There’s never been any denying the fact that the man is magic Teflon. Flaws that - even one of them - have brought down candidates before, don’t matter. You think policy matters? Bullshit. All that matters is the cult. Everything that follows is validated, because cult.

And so it goes. I said he’d win the presidency. I’ve said he’ll be re-elected. I’m betting that I end up batting 1.000 on those counts.

Flaws that in other candidates the media had reported fairly on and let the public make their own decisions on how to react to these flaws.  With Trump it was different.  Trump was the first candidate where the media was pulling the public by the nose and demanding they react to these flaws in a certain manner.  No one likes being told how to think or what to do.

Posted
1 minute ago, yoshi said:

Who the fuck is Jess Dweck and why should we care what rando's on twitter are posting? 

Is what she saying incorrect?

Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Why should I care about what yoshi has to say?

I'm not trying to make any profound statements.    So I'm not attempting to try to make anyone care what I have to say.

Posted
1 minute ago, tjhooker said:

this hit 2 BINGO spots in 1 post.  Good work!

I haven't a fucking clue what you're on about but I'm sure you think it's clever.  You have a genetic need to step on your own tiny dick.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I believe I just did respond to that charge. The MAGA hatted kid was on the receiving end of assault, not the other way around as a gleeful media originally reported.  

How's that for a response ?

Unintentionally great. My favorite part was "I did?" followed with the oh-so-clever and not at all snowflakey "verbally" assaulted qualifier. Doing it while demanding accuracy in reporting is just the cherry.

Posted

I'm trying to come to grips with this.  I always said if Mueller found nothing I would have to re-evaluate my world view.  I know there is still the actual report to come, Mueller testifying, etc, but man, this is...unexpected.

Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

So I wouldn’t be surprised if there are some leaks after today.  

I’m waiting for all the leaks on Twitter. Lots of reliable sources...

Posted
Just now, Biff Tannen said:

I'm trying to come to grips with this.  I always said if Mueller found nothing I would have to re-evaluate my world view.  I know there is still the actual report to come, Mueller testifying, etc, but man, this is...unexpected.

Really?  Trump fired Sessions and appointed Barr for precisely today. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, tjhooker said:

We set up a bingo board about what the response would be today when the report cleared Trump.  You hit 2 spots on the BINGO board.  1st one to do 2 spots in 1 post.  The responses are very predictable and your's the most predictable.

What 2 spots did I hit?  I fucking conceded the debate re: the findings of the report.

Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Really?  Trump fired Sessions and appointed Barr for precisely today. 

Wh would’ve Sessions done things any differently than Barr?

Posted
Just now, Ted Lange said:

Wh would’ve Sessions done things any differently than Barr?

Sessions was recused, it would have been all in Rosenstein and Mueller’s hands.  

Trump couldn’t trust that.

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

Wh would’ve Sessions done things any differently than Barr?

Hugo is actually right on this one. Sessions recused himself and Trump needed someone that could put it to rest.

Edited by Dolemite
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Unintentionally great. My favorite part was "I did?" followed with the oh-so-clever and not at all snowflakey "verbally" assaulted qualifier. Doing it while demanding accuracy in reporting is just the cherry.

Well, lets see. I just in the span of less than 5 minutes I said he was the victim. Are you saying I'm wrong ?  Are you gonna refute the media jumped on the story and made him the villain when it turned out it wasn't him or his friends ?    

I love how you ignore the important part of my post, and focus on the parts where I'm just having fun rubbing your nose in facts, that for some reason you seem to ignore.

 

Do you think the MAGA kid assaulted the faux veteran, as was reported widely ?

Edited by Onboard 2.0
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Zavala said:

So switch gears and look into the FISA spying or just keep hammering the all powerful Russia hacking routine?

You think the dem controlled house want to touch the FISA abuse?  

Posted
Just now, tjhooker said:

You know he is still guilty regardless what the report says.

Mueller/Barr is a shill.

Thanks for playing.

You're a fucking liar.  Quote where I said either.  Come on, do it.



×
×
  • Create New...