TRUMP for Prez

There are many left leaning moderates who may would support an alternative to trump but because endless blunders like russiagate, racism accusation, and identity politics; they might as well just give trump the re-election. Get off trump, get on policy.

Lets be real, the green new deal was silly.

Originally Posted by stevo8290

Lets be real, the green new deal was silly.

But can’t we reflect and say “lock her up,” “we will build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it,” “drain the swamp,” etc etc are equally silly?

And also that contained in each of those silly ideas is a kernel of a real idea (enforcement of our borders in the case of the wall; recognition of the worlds biggest economy’s influence on scientifically proven man made climate change in the case of the GND).

The more extreme specifics of the green new deal (like Mexico paying for the wall) are more a reflection of policymakers pandering to their extremes than anything else.

I agree that there’s a silent majority of moderates out there. But those folks don’t march on Washington demanding compromise or call their congresspeople demanding bipartisan legislation.

Instead we let the extreme factions from both sides drive “our side’s” agenda with the hope that the crazier elements will get worn down through the process.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

But can’t we reflect and say “lock her up,” “we will build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it,” “drain the swamp,” etc etc are equally silly?

And also that contained in each of those silly ideas is a kernel of a real idea (enforcement of our borders in the case of the wall; recognition of the worlds biggest economy’s influence on scientifically proven man made climate change in the case of the GND).

The more extreme specifics of the green new deal (like Mexico paying for the wall) are more a reflection of policymakers pandering to their extremes than anything else.

I agree that there’s a silent majority of moderates out there. But those folks don’t march on Washington demanding compromise or call their congresspeople demanding bipartisan legislation.

Instead we let the extreme factions from both sides drive “our side’s” agenda with the hope that the crazier elements will get worn down through the process.

Particularly, since "lock her up" was directed at how Hillary handled classified emails. It seems that instead of trying to investigate her, Team Trump decided it would be in the best interest of the country to handled classified emails in a similar manner. Who knew that "Drain the swamp" meant filling your cabinet with DC insiders?

;-)

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

My son just bought a house in Cookeville, TN, beautiful part of the country, I'm sure I will be going back and forth from there all the time. I don't think Trump stays down here in Florida in the summertime, maybe you should just look for a winter home down here in Florida, just like Trump.

Why would I need a winter home. It is only about 50 degrees at the lowest during the day time in the winter here. Only reason I am moving that way is the affordability and tax situation. You can still live poor in Florida, you live under an overpass in Cali if you don't make a $100,000 a year and have family or someone to rely on. Rich people can do what they want, doesn't change my life.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

But can’t we reflect and say “lock her up,” “we will build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it,” “drain the swamp,” etc etc are equally silly?

And also that contained in each of those silly ideas is a kernel of a real idea (enforcement of our borders in the case of the wall; recognition of the worlds biggest economy’s influence on scientifically proven man made climate change in the case of the GND).

The more extreme specifics of the green new deal (like Mexico paying for the wall) are more a reflection of policymakers pandering to their extremes than anything else.

I agree that there’s a silent majority of moderates out there. But those folks don’t march on Washington demanding compromise or call their congresspeople demanding bipartisan legislation.

Instead we let the extreme factions from both sides drive “our side’s” agenda with the hope that the crazier elements will get worn down through the process.

Man made global warming is not proven. Climate change is one thing. Man made absolutely is not. Enforcing our border is not a radical idea. Giving over our sovriegnty to the 3rd world over a hoax is radical.

Originally Posted by wake77

Particularly, since "lock her up" was directed at how Hillary handled classified emails. It seems that instead of trying to investigate her, Team Trump decided it would be in the best interest of the country to handled classified emails in a similar manner. Who knew that "Drain the swamp" meant filling your cabinet with DC insiders?

Not sure how he is handling classified material in a similar manner. Care to expand?

Drain the swamp. I guess it depends on how deep the swamp goes? Democrats can not comment on it because they clearly voted to keep the swamp (thus your vote for Hillary). Only people who really have a comment would be Trump voters. I am not worried about the swamp thing as it is more political jargon or a concept at best. Unfortunately, not a single person who gains the presidency is prepared to have everyone in government to not be from government. Just too big. You would never be able to transition power and run any form of functioning branch ever if it were not for the political parties already having people lined up to help. Trump can not possibly know all these people. Just like Obama did not know everyone that helped him. Just the simple truth. You will never have a wholesale draining of anything.

I think he is talking about Trump using his cell phone, Kushner using Facetime app to handle foreign relations with Saudis and others and Ivanka using a private email server for govt business. Plus both of them couldn't qualify for top secret security clearance yet somehow they both have them, nothing to see here, look away. Basically all the same things the grifter has been screaming Crooked Hillary Clinton did but there doing it now. Just a guess tho. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...su/3339849002/
Trump campaigned on Drain the Swamp, "Promises made Promises kept". Democrats have the obligation to comment on it. The issue is the grifter has been worse than any president or administration in history. We all still recall Tom Price, Scott Pruit, David Burnhardt, Andrew Wheeler, Ryan Zinke, and on and on.... Remember when despite a pledge to donate all profits from foreign entities to the U.S. Treasury to avoid conflicts of interest, Trump’s businesses now “say it would be ‘impractical,’ to require customers representing foreign nations to identify themselves. Its the people he picks while claiming he only hires the best people. He hires the worst on every opportunity. He hired barr strictly to protect himself. At least he is fulfilling his pledge for the Republicans to be the party of Healthcare. Better prices, lower deductibles and better insurance for all and less $ than Obamacare. I cant wait!!!
So this report that 100% completely exonerated trump, where is it? One would think a report that totally clears the grifter that they would get it out fast, like Barrs "summary". Now it appears its about as good as Devin Nunez full exoneration report.
So, does trump release the great new republican healthcare plan or his tax returns first?

Originally Posted by 95sn

I think he is talking about Trump using his cell phone, Kushner using Facetime app to handle foreign relations with Saudis and others and Ivanka using a private email server for govt business. Plus both of them couldn't qualify for top secret security clearance yet somehow they both have them, nothing to see here, look away. Basically all the same things the grifter has been screaming Crooked Hillary Clinton did but there doing it now. Just a guess tho. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...su/3339849002/
Trump campaigned on Drain the Swamp, "Promises made Promises kept". Democrats have the obligation to comment on it. The issue is the grifter has been worse than any president or administration in history. We all still recall Tom Price, Scott Pruit, David Burnhardt, Andrew Wheeler, Ryan Zinke, and on and on.... Remember when despite a pledge to donate all profits from foreign entities to the U.S. Treasury to avoid conflicts of interest, Trump’s businesses now “say it would be ‘impractical,’ to require customers representing foreign nations to identify themselves. Its the people he picks while claiming he only hires the best people. He hires the worst on every opportunity. He hired barr strictly to protect himself. At least he is fulfilling his pledge for the Republicans to be the party of Healthcare. Better prices, lower deductibles and better insurance for all and less $ than Obamacare. I cant wait!!!
So this report that 100% completely exonerated trump, where is it? One would think a report that totally clears the grifter that they would get it out fast, like Barrs "summary". Now it appears its about as good as Devin Nunez full exoneration report.
So, does trump release the great new republican healthcare plan or his tax returns first?

I am pretty sure you do not know what you are talking about when it comes to qualifying for top secret clearances. Facetime is allowed. The government has the exact policy to have a "use your own" cell phone as long as he has the proper management software on it. You love to think you understand what you are talking about but you could not be more wrong on your understanding of issues.

Mishandling of classified material is way different than having devices approved for government business. You do understand that right?

Democrats have zero obligation to comment on it. You are the swamp and it was emptied. Trump does not need your vote so complain all you want.

End of the day, you wasted 2 years learning all these conspiracy theories and you have egg on your face. Good luck with your future omlettes.

The omlette thing is funny yet I have no egg and we have no 100% exoneration report.
Conspiracy theories is more what FOX does. Daily. the Republican appointed Republican that appointed the Republican that investigated the Republican held back and that the Republican controlled DOJ Slick Willie Barr (30 days in office) shouts 100% exoneration!... and still no report. Beware the deep state democrats. FOX is the deep state.
Im not interested in Barrs summary. Im interested in what muellar actually found out. The details of trump world yall are so proud of.

Originally Posted by 95sn

The omlette thing is funny yet I have no egg and we have no 100% exoneration report.
Conspiracy theories is more what FOX does. Daily. the Republican appointed Republican that appointed the Republican that investigated the Republican held back and that the Republican controlled DOJ Slick Willie Barr (30 days in office) shouts 100% exoneration!... and still no report. Beware the deep state democrats. FOX is the deep state.
Im not interested in Barrs summary. Im interested in what muellar actually found out. The details of trump world yall are so proud of.

Uh huh. It's your story, go ahead and tell it. Do you really want to go through this thread and see how many times you said Mueller was going to get the dirt and going to prosecute Trump? You know what Mueller found out. He did not recommend prosecution for anything. Done son. Mueller was your man. He did his job. Keeping up with this bull crap is just going to really piss people off.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Man made global warming is not proven. Climate change is one thing. Man made absolutely is not. Enforcing our border is not a radical idea. Giving over our sovriegnty to the 3rd world over a hoax is radical.

We were discussing this from the perspective of moderates, Delta. You do give a good example of the uncompromising intellectual purity that drives the republican base tho. Much to the chagrin of republican moderates.

Mueller isnt my man, he is a life long republican as is Rosenstein, Barr, Sessions and all the others running the deep state. I will continue to await his report and the evidence he believes is true. Isnt it odd it took 400 pages of report to say complete exoneration? The Mueller report is not the be all end all in any way, its one of several investigations surrounding the trump train. I think muellers intention was to allow congress to decide to prosecute or not, Barrs stole the punt when no one was looking. How could a system work if the decision is to be made by a political appointee, 30 days into his job... it doesnt. Thats why congress and the public need to know the facts and not just what has been public thus far. BTW, whats public so far is more than enough. Its not "Done son" until the evidence/report is released to us and then there is the intelligence investigation, the judicial, financial depts. all doing their congressional oversite investigations on trumps inaugural, his campaign, his foundation, his trump org...... Your dude has large, heavy baggage. Today he said (again) his dad was born in Germany. He wasnt, he was born in NY. Lies about anything for no reason, simply proved a falsehood, that is a sickness. Unfit. No wonder his attys would not allow a sit down w/ mueller. Wait, when was the last time someone (anyone) was investigated yet the investigators were not allowed to ask questions. Hmm, its almost like handcuffing the investigators. Must be the deep state.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

We were discussing this from the perspective of moderates, Delta. You do give a good example of the uncompromising intellectual purity that drives the republican base tho. Much to the chagrin of republican moderates.

Republican moderate believe in man made global warming and the need to allow the 3rd word to tax us? Trust me, they are not republicans anymore than 95sn is a republican. Climate change is real. Just pull out the temperature data over they last million years (core samples). We are more than likely heading up another 4 degrees. There is a reason they used to say such and such area was a sea floor that they are living on. Seems like a nice moderate stance if you ask me.

Where you start going radical is pretending that usage equals pollution. The US has the highest safe guards on pollution in the world. Even then, CO2 levels move around without man all through history and we are actually at a earth lifetime low in CO2. Interesting that CO2 level is low and has been continuing to go lower for the earths existence, but we still get ice ages and melt offs. Never fear, if we tax the US worker, the rest of the world will be saved. People who talk that garbage are the radicals. And truth be told, the ideas mirror that of biblical predictions of people voting for a one world government.

Republicans only have a few base issue. That is why it is so easy for Republicans of all economic levels to be lock step. What you are describing are those who don't know who they are yet and vote for the best sound byte. You see it every day the righteous path is the hardest to follow because there are so many other paths that are easier. There is a reason the democrat party needs 18 year olds and illegals without a high school education. They need to work the emotional angle because facts don't add up.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Republican moderate believe in man made global warming and the need to allow the 3rd word to tax us? Trust me, they are not republicans anymore than 95sn is a republican. Climate change is real. Just pull out the temperature data over they last million years (core samples). We are more than likely heading up another 4 degrees. There is a reason they used to say such and such area was a sea floor that they are living on. Seems like a nice moderate stance if you ask me.



Where you start going radical is pretending that usage equals pollution. The US has the highest safe guards on pollution in the world. Even then, CO2 levels move around without man all through history and we are actually at a earth lifetime low in CO2. Interesting that CO2 level is low and has been continuing to go lower for the earths existence, but we still get ice ages and melt offs. Never fear, if we tax the US worker, the rest of the world will be saved. People who talk that garbage are the radicals. And truth be told, the ideas mirror that of biblical predictions of people voting for a one world government.



Republicans only have a few base issue. That is why it is so easy for Republicans of all economic levels to be lock step. What you are describing are those who don't know who they are yet and vote for the best sound byte. You see it every day the righteous path is the hardest to follow because there are so many other paths that are easier. There is a reason the democrat party needs 18 year olds and illegals without a high school education. They need to work the emotional angle because facts don't add up.

Thank you for proving my point Delta.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Mueller isnt my man, he is a life long republican as is Rosenstein, Barr, Sessions and all the others running the deep state. I will continue to await his report and the evidence he believes is true. Isnt it odd it took 400 pages of report to say complete exoneration? The Mueller report is not the be all end all in any way, its one of several investigations surrounding the trump train. I think muellers intention was to allow congress to decide to prosecute or not, Barrs stole the punt when no one was looking. How could a system work if the decision is to be made by a political appointee, 30 days into his job... it doesnt. Thats why congress and the public need to know the facts and not just what has been public thus far. BTW, whats public so far is more than enough. Its not "Done son" until the evidence/report is released to us and then there is the intelligence investigation, the judicial, financial depts. all doing their congressional oversite investigations on trumps inaugural, his campaign, his foundation, his trump org...... Your dude has large, heavy baggage. Today he said (again) his dad was born in Germany. He wasnt, he was born in NY. Lies about anything for no reason, simply proved a falsehood, that is a sickness. Unfit. No wonder his attys would not allow a sit down w/ mueller. Wait, when was the last time someone (anyone) was investigated yet the investigators were not allowed to ask questions. Hmm, its almost like handcuffing the investigators. Must be the deep state.

Uh huh. You ever ask yourself why this is so important to you?

You really must read everything this guy does or read all the reports by others who have the same Trump Derangement Syndrome that you have. Why are you not pissed off that your governor is down in a south or central American country asking them what California can do for them? You really want more of your tax dollars leaving the state to the 3rd world?

You realize the investigator made his call right. He said no prosecutions. Barr did not say that. Mueller did. Of course you democrats are going to continue investigate and try and disrupt and all you are doing is pissing off all the regular people and the moderates. The house will try and do what they do until they pissed off enough people who vote them out in a little less then 2 years. Even if they get something done, the Senate is not going to move at all on the deal. So, there you go. It is all about politics now even more so than it was when the democrats paid A FOREIGN AGENT to make up a report.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Thank you for proving my point Delta.

NO point proven. You never articulated a point

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

NO point proven. You never articulated a point

Actually I did articulate a point but it doesn’t surprise me that you look past it so easily.

My point was that the “silly” stuff that gets said from both sides generally starts from a kernel of truth but gets taken to crazy town from the extreme fringe of each party.

On cue, you’ve delivered several extremist rants, each of which starts from a kernel of truth, staking out positions that aren’t shared by moderates.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Actually I did articulate a point but it doesn’t surprise me that you look past it so easily.

My point was that the “silly” stuff that gets said from both sides generally starts from a kernel of truth but gets taken to crazy town from the extreme fringe of each party.

On cue, you’ve delivered several extremist rants, each of which starts from a kernel of truth, staking out positions that aren’t shared by moderates.

I disagree. My positions are very moderate. The democrat party has become so radical that you can not see it anymore. You realize your party is basically a continuation of tryingtot remove rights of the citizens and replace them with foreign citizens which the democrats have national at least said out loud they were against. They are also the party who used to be for the American worker. Now they are for the foreign worker. Go back and listen to JFK speak and tell me your party is the same today. That is why you have lost pretty much all of the fly over countries democrats. They understand who that party is now.

So you mean to tell me that you not knowing which bathroom to use is not a radical position?

Trying to sign treaties that allow foreign countries dictate trade to American business owners inside America is not radical?

Letting millions of illegals come over the border and then shield them from our federal laws is not a radical position?

Constantly trying to remove our second amendment rights is not a radical position?

Constantly separating people by skin color and economic status is not radical?

Shall I go on with who the radical is?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I disagree. My positions are very moderate. The democrat party has become so radical that you can not see it anymore. You realize your party is basically a continuation of tryingtot remove rights of the citizens and replace them with foreign citizens which the democrats have national at least said out loud they were against. They are also the party who used to be for the American worker. Now they are for the foreign worker. Go back and listen to JFK speak and tell me your party is the same today. That is why you have lost pretty much all of the fly over countries democrats. They understand who that party is now.



So you mean to tell me that you not knowing which bathroom to use is not a radical position?



Trying to sign treaties that allow foreign countries dictate trade to American business owners inside America is not radical?



Letting millions of illegals come over the border and then shield them from our federal laws is not a radical position?



Constantly trying to remove our second amendment rights is not a radical position?



Constantly separating people by skin color and economic status is not radical?



Shall I go on with who the radical is?

Again, thank you.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Actually I did articulate a point but it doesn’t surprise me that you look past it so easily.

My point was that the “silly” stuff that gets said from both sides generally starts from a kernel of truth but gets taken to crazy town from the extreme fringe of each party.

On cue, you’ve delivered several extremist rants, each of which starts from a kernel of truth, staking out positions that aren’t shared by moderates.

Also, the difference is the "silly" kernel of truth from the democrat side is usually being pushed for actual legislation against the rest. Have fun with your gender neutral toys and sitting while you pee.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Again, thank you.

Then we will never have a kernel of agreement and that is why this country is in a current cold civil war. I will never agree with your positions.

not to change directions, but is it possible to carry the caravan through the USA and just migrate the immigrant movement to Canada. If mexico can pass along the caravan, why cant we!. How much would it cost to just, bus them to the next country? It would create bus driver jobs, and they can become Canadian.

The Dems could use this to say "See boarders are immoral" and the Canadians would have to take them or they would be EVIL!

For the life of me I cannot figure out why every single MAGAt on wakeworld keeps going on and on about "boarders"

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Then we will never have a kernel of agreement and that is why this country is in a current cold civil war. I will never agree with your positions.

X2

Originally Posted by pesos

For the life of me I cannot figure out why every single MAGAt on wakeworld keeps going on and on about "boarders"

Not me, baby.

Originally Posted by pesos

For the life of me I cannot figure out why every single MAGAt on wakeworld keeps going on and on about "boarders"

Maybe it is to pay homage to the site.

Originally Posted by dougr

not to change directions, but is it possible to carry the caravan through the USA and just migrate the immigrant movement to Canada. If mexico can pass along the caravan, why cant we!. How much would it cost to just, bus them to the next country? It would create bus driver jobs, and they can become Canadian.

The Dems could use this to say "See boarders are immoral" and the Canadians would have to take them or they would be EVIL!

Isn't this one up to 20,000 people now? Any takers on here want to let them squat in a room or two they have empty? Maybe we can use the doctors in the crowd to help bring down healthcare costs.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I will never agree with your positions.

You and I actually agree quite frequently.

If by “my positions” you mean your list of strawmen, then we already agree because I don’t agree with those extreme positions either.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

You and I actually agree quite frequently.

If by “my positions” you mean your list of strawmen, then we already agree because I don’t agree with those extreme positions either.

Then there is hope. Unfortunately, I believe you are more of a minority in your party now. I am not sure my list is a list of strawmen considering every single thing I mentioned was voted on policy decisions or where actual positions that action was taken on and certainly has been openly debated on this site. Besides, I would not admit to a straw in california, one may get 5 to 10 for having a straw.

You realize the investigator made his call right. He said no prosecutions. Barr did not say that. Mueller did.

Help out a poor dumb fool, where does it say that?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...er-report.html

The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

Like I said, Mueller left it to congress. Barr "assumed" he could say it was up to him to make the call but there is no precedence for a political appointee to determine that. Barr has been called on it and he cant sit on it forever. Precedence leaves it to congress. They need all the info for an informed decision. Unless I just missed it, correct me.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Then there is hope. Unfortunately, I believe you are more of a minority in your party now. I am not sure my list is a list of strawmen considering every single thing I mentioned was voted on policy decisions or where actual positions that action was taken on and certainly has been openly debated on this site. Besides, I would not admit to a straw in california, one may get 5 to 10 for having a straw.

ha. We were up at south lake tahoe over the weekend and saw the straw ban first hand.

regarding extremes, just remember that when congress is split (or in control of the opposite party as the WH) it's easy to stake out extremes because there are no consequences. Case in point being the dozens of times the house "repealed Obamacare" between 2012-16. Then when in actual control couldn't get it done because the folks who would go along with the theater of it got cold feet when things got "real."

Today's progressives are yesterday's freedom caucus in that regard. Different bus, but same destination (Crazytown!).

Most votes are political theater in DC.

In Kalifornia, not so much. All these things I mentioned are actual public policy. We have gennder neutral bathrooms in majority of places. My daughters old middle school, they are not allowed to use boy or girl. They are required to use gender neutral references. They have attacked the second amendment. They do have sanctuary laws shielding those in the country illegally. They also will not allow you to ask their citizen status for seeking employment. I can go on. What you do not agree with and don't believe is happening in Washington IS happening in Kalifornia.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Help out a poor dumb fool, where does it say that?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...er-report.html

The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
The Special Counsel's decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel's office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel's obstruction investigation. After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president.

Like I said, Mueller left it to congress. Barr "assumed" he could say it was up to him to make the call but there is no precedence for a political appointee to determine that. Barr has been called on it and he cant sit on it forever. Precedence leaves it to congress. They need all the info for an informed decision. Unless I just missed it, correct me.

They literally told you in this article that they did not recommend prosecution. They even said they did not even consider the fact he is president and that their would be an issue with indicting a sitting president. They said they could not recommend it based on applying the law. You do realize that any law enforcement entity can not call someone guilty or not guilty. They can only recommend that a case move forward to a proper authority based on the evidence they collected.

Basically, if a cop can not come up with evidence, they are going to have a hard time citing you for an offense. Then even if they can find evidence or even if they can not find evidence, the DA still may choose or not to choose to prosecute. This is what we have here. They don't have enough even to say to the DA that they believe they can make a case. Still goes to the DA because you have a person of interest and the DA has to decide what to do. The smart DA listens to the investigators and does not prosecute. You can write all the news articles trying to manipulate this fact and make it look like there is more to it but there is not. Of course it is up to the DA to say if they will pursue it or not and the answer would absolutely be a big fat NO because the investigator has no evidence. Water is wet. The DA always makes the final call. Unless you are that idiot who prosecuted the Duke Lacross players (who was disbarred for it), they will not touch this with a 10 foot pole.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Help out a poor dumb fool, where does it say that?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...er-report.html

Like I said, Mueller left it to congress. Barr "assumed" he could say it was up to him to make the call but there is no precedence for a political appointee to determine that. Barr has been called on it and he cant sit on it forever. Precedence leaves it to congress. They need all the info for an informed decision. Unless I just missed it, correct me.

Mueller does not report to congress. He reports to the executive branch through the AG. The AG is appointed and under the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution, the officeholder is nominated by the President of the United States and appointed with the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

Sure he is a political appointee but does not get seated without the representatives of the people saying he can hold that office.

You just said it. The AG can hold the report as long as he wants. That means the report is his to do what he wants. Not sure how you contradicted yourself in two lines. The house just wants it for political theater and you should be smart enough to understand that. They can carry on, pick it apart all they want. If they truly had the balls, the could try and impeach him right now if they want. They don't need the report. They also have the power to investigate separately and they are. You really think they are going to get a better answer than Mueller? They have the votes to impeach right now, but they won't. It would set a terrible set of future circumstances. All the remaining talk is for the press to save face and for the true believers to have something to hold on too.

You really think they are going to get a better answer than Mueller?

that is the problem, the Mueller report has not been released. Barr for some reason is sitting on it.


It does not say that they did not recc prosecution. What it says is "The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction" Not drawing a conclusion is not the same as deciding not to prosecute. But you already know that.

Originally Posted by 95sn

that is the problem, the Mueller report has not been released. Barr for some reason is sitting on it.


It does not say that they did not recc prosecution. What it says is "The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction" Not drawing a conclusion is not the same as deciding not to prosecute. But you already know that.

Considering that was the whole reason he was investigating. RUSSIAN COLLUSION. If you can not draw a conclusion then you don't have evidence. The lead investigator in the country could not come up with anything to draw a conclusion. Man I hope you are not in a jury of someones peers. The job of the law enforcement is to enforce law and find evidence to support their claims if someone broke the law. The Prosecutor can decide to take the case regardless of evidence but could loose their whole career if they are proven to act in malice. You really think someone is going to prosecute if your head guy with an unlimited budget can not even give you a recommendation to move forward?

Let the democrats do their own investigation. The AG is not going to get his hands dirty in this when any law enforcement would not touch this even with your pole.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Considering that was the whole reason he was investigating. RUSSIAN COLLUSION. If you can not draw a conclusion then you don't have evidence. .

Still haven't read Meuller's appointment letter, I see. Seems kinda disingenuous to complain about "having evidence," when you willfully refuse to spend 45 seconds reading.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

In Kalifornia, not so much. All these things I mentioned are actual public policy.

that's called democracy. You will note that Utah has a .05 dui law and that red states are pushing more aggressive abortion laws too. The founders anticipated that citizens of the various states would choose different laws to govern themselves. That's how it works. Just like it must suck to be a progressive in Alabama, it's probably pretty frustrating to be a MAGA hat wearer in the Bay Area.

Conservatives don't like state and local rights.

Originally Posted by fly135

Conservatives don't like state and local rights.

unless they are asserting them. Sagebrush Rebellion anyone?

So when Trump states that his father was born in Germany is he:
A. Lying for no reason
or
B. Suffering cognitive decline

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Still haven't read Meuller's appointment letter, I see. Seems kinda disingenuous to complain about "having evidence," when you willfully refuse to spend 45 seconds reading.

I am not complaining about evidence. Did Mueller recommend charges against Trump or his family. YES or NO. Period. Mueller certainly recommended charges for various other issues did he not?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I am not complaining about evidence. Did Mueller recommend charges against Trump or his family. YES or NO. Period. Mueller certainly recommended charges for various other issues did he not?

Your base assertion in all caps that the investigation was about RUSSIAN COLLUSION is factually inaccurate. Period.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

that's called democracy. You will note that Utah has a .05 dui law and that red states are pushing more aggressive abortion laws too. The founders anticipated that citizens of the various states would choose different laws to govern themselves. That's how it works. Just like it must suck to be a progressive in Alabama, it's probably pretty frustrating to be a MAGA hat wearer in the Bay Area.

Actually there was an article just today in one of the big bay area news organizations about a 76 year old man assaulted in the bay area for wearing a MAGA hat.

For starters we are not exactly a democracy.

Different states can choose to govern themselves but not in place of federal law. One being the federal immigration law. The state may choose to not track down people but it is another to have laws on the books that go directly against the federal law. So much for your election concerns. Illegals everywhere making millions of democrat voters who will overrun the election system within one generation. Already happened in california. Went from a Republican state to a plus 3 million democrat voter within 20 years.

Same with the second amendment.

On your abortion thing. Good for all those states. Nothing like a nazi genocide project propped up by the state.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Your base assertion in all caps that the investigation was about RUSSIAN COLLUSION is factually inaccurate. Period.

What have we been talking about on this forum for 2 years? It was not if so and so was a tax cheat. It was not who was going to lie to the FBI. You know as well as I do all anyone in this forum was pushing and what CNN was pushing was collusion. There is zero legal action that is coming from this whole affair. That means what is going on from here on out is politics. Politics are narratives and labels.

Originally Posted by fly135

Conservatives don't like state and local rights.

Not when they are taking away our rights granted by the constitution.

Originally Posted by ralph

So when Trump states that his father was born in Germany is he:
A. Lying for no reason
or
B. Suffering cognitive decline

Look. We get it, you don't like the guy. There is a certain point and it has been passed by you liberals where all you attacks on Trump are attacks on all Republicans. If Trump had a D by his name and fighting for your causes like share the wealth to the world and destroy our economy, then you would be all for it. Face it. You and the others hate his policies and are looking for everything else to discredit the guy. We see through it. Your constant attacks are not about Trump, it is personal against the people who want the same policies and we will bully you back. You liberals should not have had your DNC arm called the press to push Trump to the front because they thought it would be easy pickings for Hillary. If it were not Trump, it would be the next Republican you guys would try and pick apart. Just like you guys did Bush. Just like they did with Reagan. There is zero you guys are going to say that makes me or any other Republican dislike the guy because you guys have for years proven over and over again that you hate Republicans and what we stand for. It is personal with a lot of Republicans at this point. We really do believe liberals are the enemy of the country more than almost all outside forces.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

that's called democracy. You will note that Utah has a .05 dui law and that red states are pushing more aggressive abortion laws too. The founders anticipated that citizens of the various states would choose different laws to govern themselves. That's how it works. Just like it must suck to be a progressive in Alabama, it's probably pretty frustrating to be a MAGA hat wearer in the Bay Area.

Also, the context that you are answering on is if my list was considered radical. You are now countering with "that's democracy". You can still have radicals in a democracy. You do know this right? Your premise was my list was a straw man. I pointed out that these ideas were either passed into law in this country or were debated in the public square thus they were not strawmen arguments but an indictment of what the democrat party has become. Radical.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

There is a certain point and it has been passed by you liberals where all you attacks on Trump are attacks on all Republicans.

Boo hoo, what a snowflake.

Awe. Your posts did not change republicans minds? Awe. Bless your heart. Don't worry. You are still a foreigner trying to influence America's elections and nothing will change that unless you sneak over the border and have 6 kids that you get to vote the way you want. All I can say is the liberals body of work even on this forum never mind the whole political sphere tells us there is not a single republican that is acceptable. All those people can not be bad people so it has to be the policy. If it is the policy, well then you are directly attacking our way of life. That is why liberals are the enemy especially foreigners who try and push liberal agendas.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Also, the context that you are answering on is if my list was considered radical. You are now countering with "that's democracy". You can still have radicals in a democracy. You do know this right? Your premise was my list was a straw man. I pointed out that these ideas were either passed into law in this country or were debated in the public square thus they were not strawmen arguments but an indictment of what the democrat party has become. Radical.

Your premise: these are things all democrats want.

My premise: no they aren't.

What a dem in Alabama, Arizona, Maine, or Montana wants is going to be different that what someone in SF or NYC wants. Not sure why that's hard to understand.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

What have we been talking about on this forum for 2 years?

AFAIK the Mueller investigation did not take its marching orders from WW. Do you have different information?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

All I can say is the liberals body of work even on this forum never mind the whole political sphere tells us there is not a single republican that is acceptable.

Again, not true. But perhaps you can drive your point home with your list of acceptable democrats?

Tough week for the grifter. We never heard a word for 22 months from anyone involved with Mueller investigation. They are talking now. Orange you glad?
https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...-trump-russia/

Originally Posted by 95sn

Tough week for the grifter. We never heard a word for 22 months from anyone involved with Mueller investigation. They are talking now. Orange you glad?

https://www.esquire.com/news-politic...-trump-russia/

I’m 100% not impressed with this story. Anonymous sources, not even necessarily prosecutors. This is the kind of bs off the record innuendo that gives validity to the fake news outcry.

Show us the report and let us decide for ourselves.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Look. We get it, you don't like the guy.

If you think it's about "liking him", then you don't get it at all.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

I’m 100% not impressed with this story. Anonymous sources, not even necessarily prosecutors. This is the kind of bs off the record innuendo that gives validity to the fake news outcry.

Show us the report and let us decide for ourselves.

I hear you. The NY Times and Wash Post are reporting this. But its all I got, so far. I also understand why one would not want to be id'ed. Its the first time their silence has been broken. Barr starting to remind me of John Mitchell, Nixons AG who went to jail for obstruction. At what point do we go from waiting for Barr to release to calling it a cover-up? This started with Barrs mis-calculated "summary". FOX and Trump immediately screamed COMPLETE and TOTAL EXONERATION as noted here by "G" and Delta. Trump several times said to release the report....until they finally got thru to him that it may not be all roses. Now he changed his tune and they continue to hold back the report. It is going to come out and the longer they block the worse the optics are.

Rand Paul latest to block release. The 5th time Repubs blocked release.
https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-acti...mueller-report

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Your premise: these are things all democrats want.

My premise: no they aren't.

What a dem in Alabama, Arizona, Maine, or Montana wants is going to be different that what someone in SF or NYC wants. Not sure why that's hard to understand.

I understand, however your leadership in the party is specifically from those 2 states (NY and California). Most specifically California where radical positions originate from.

This is also why the traditional democrat states are turning Republican. The fight is not about workers rights and who shares in the the American Pie. To Republicans it is squarely about attacks against their religion, their second amendment rights, colorless policies and the sovreignty of the country. I am sure some of your democrats in these area have the same concerns and I am sure that is what you are telling me now. However your (collectively your) attacks against all thing Republican says you are against those things I just laid out in favor of what we perceive as the very thing we are fighting against. It turns out you have a like mind on many of these things but you politics tells a different story. How does that get fixed when there is a frenzy of radicalism in the country?

I think many intelligent demecrats realize there is a big radical influence over the party right now. Right now we can not even agree as the tools that these radicals are using. I will tell you in two words: Environmentalism and illegal immigration. What says you?

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

AFAIK the Mueller investigation did not take its marching orders from WW. Do you have different information?

These discussions on Wake World drove the narrative. CNN drove the narrative. I am not worried one bit about the Mueller report or his investigation because the whole thing reeked of politics from the very beginning. The democrats knew there was nothing there too. It is all about narrative control. In the press and on wake world. I certainly would not be on here talking about this if this was not the narrative. CNN certainly would not be talking about it if it did not involve Trump. Madow's ratings would not have dropped in half after Trump did not get prosecuted if that was not the narrative. You can stick with legalize all you want. You are the only one who read the original source for the investigation.

Originally Posted by fly135

If you think it's about "liking him", then you don't get it at all.

I do get it and I laid it out. You do not like any Republican. Shall we see if the archives go back to Bush? I read WW every day during Obama too. I just did not post for a long time. You guys gave Obama passes for the same things Bush did and for what other democrats said they were for and what they voted for. It was and is never about a open mind to actual policy decisions. It is about trying to force a narrative against a singular person because of the political party. That is fine, but don't piss down peoples legs and tell us it is raining.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You are the only one who read the original source for the investigation.

Well, me and Meuller. You know, the guy whose report you are saying answers the question he wasn't asked.

Originally Posted by 95sn

I hear you. The NY Times and Wash Post are reporting this. But its all I got, so far. I also understand why one would not want to be id'ed. Its the first time their silence has been broken. Barr starting to remind me of John Mitchell, Nixons AG who went to jail for obstruction. At what point do we go from waiting for Barr to release to calling it a cover-up? This started with Barrs mis-calculated "summary". FOX and Trump immediately screamed COMPLETE and TOTAL EXONERATION as noted here by "G" and Delta. Trump several times said to release the report....until they finally got thru to him that it may not be all roses. Now he changed his tune and they continue to hold back the report. It is going to come out and the longer they block the worse the optics are.

Rand Paul latest to block release. The 5th time Repubs blocked release.
https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-acti...mueller-report

What optics is that? You mean to tell me that democrats, republicans who did not vote for him the first time and the mice in there pockets that allow them to say "we" are not going to vote for Trump (again) if this is not released? Don't even care. Trump already paid the price of the village idiots for 2 years. The rest of us don't care anymore. He will get my vote again just on that principle alone.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Well, me and Meuller. You know, the guy whose report you are saying answers the question he wasn't asked.

Sorry did not see Mueller or you for that fact on Wake World or CNN trying to tell everyone raging that the investigation was not about Trump. You had 2 years to say those words. Just pretty convenient now the end game is here and there is no recommendations for prosecutions that we hear from you that you are only for what the original purpose was. Not buying it. All words and actions for 2 years tell a different story. Buy hey, it is your story so you tell it.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I think many intelligent demecrats realize there is a big radical influence over the party right now. Right now we can not even agree as the tools that these radicals are using. I will tell you in two words: Environmentalism and illegal immigration. What says you?

You are most certainly right. Moderate republicans have been fleeing the republican party for years. Fiscal conservatives who aren't xenophobes or social conservatives have been driven away since at least 04.

I completely agree that "fear of the brown" is used as a political tool. Just look at the fact that the number of congresspeople from districts that border mexico who are in favor of da wall is zero. And yet people from Michigan and Wisconsin and the Dakotas, where immigration from the southern border is a non-issue, are the big fans.

I'm not sure what you mean about "environmentalism" as a generalization. Clean air, clean water, and fuel efficient (and much safer) vehicles are all a result of federal regulation, NOT some universal gathering of common sense. Just go back and check the number of unhealthy days in LA in the 70s vs. today (notwithstanding population growth too). Lead paint. Asbestos. water pollution. Not sure how any reasonably person can say that the environment was "greater" 40 years ago... you know, before republicans created the EPA.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

it is your story so you tell it.

After Trump fired Comey "because of the Russia thing" (his words) and Sessions recused himself for failing to disclose several contacts with Russians before and after the campaign, Mueller was appointed to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election and related crimes discovered in the course of the investigation.

That's the story, in a sentence.

You democrats think that their is some Smoking Gun in the Muller report that some how Some Way didn't get Leaked or is waiting for your Faithful Leaders to un earth!
People Like Maxine Waters from Compton Ca is gonna get to the Bottom of things LOL LOL, Same for Grandma Nancy. These Truth Seekers will bring you all Snowflakes to the motherland! BHaaaaaaaaaa!

WOW do you Democrats believe in the Easter Bunny & Santa Clause as well. One thing for sure you democrats sure like a good story. So it makes perfect sense, Secrete Pee Pee Files with story's of Russian Hookers and Putin Blackmailing TRUMP, You and CNN cant rock your self to sleep with story's of Impeachment any more. Boo Hoo! So Sad. Its like when your favorite NetFlix series ends! Your like What the hell and I gonna do now! LOL LOL LOL

What optics is that?

The optics are if the report completely exonerates mein grifter why are Barr, McConnel, Paul and a few more refusing to release it?

Same old story from you.
No Evidence, trump exonerated.

Okay, some evidence but not enough to prove anything!

Okay, some of that evidence led to more evidence uncovered in the House Intelligence investigation, but its still a witch hunt!

Okay, trumps a witch but there is nothing illegal about being a witch!

Okay, maybe being a witch is illegal but if it is he did not know it!

Okay, maybe he knew being a witch was illegal but he did it to save America from Clinton!

Okay, so maybe he just did it to get rich and pay off his debts to Qutar, Saudia Arabia et al and screwing you over in the process, but if he did Its your fault for voting him in.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Show us the report and let us decide for ourselves.

100% agree. Enough opinions on the report nobody has read already. Let's read it and decide for ourselves how significant it is.

Originally Posted by 95sn

The optics are if the report completely exonerates mein grifter why are Barr, McConnel, Paul and a few more refusing to release it?

Same old story from you.
No Evidence, trump exonerated.

Okay, some evidence but not enough to prove anything!

Okay, some of that evidence led to more evidence uncovered in the House Intelligence investigation, but its still a witch hunt!

Okay, trumps a witch but there is nothing illegal about being a witch!

Okay, maybe being a witch is illegal but if it is he did not know it!

Okay, maybe he knew being a witch was illegal but he did it to save America from Clinton!

Okay, so maybe he just did it to get rich and pay off his debts to Qutar, Saudia Arabia et al and screwing you over in the process, but if he did Its your fault for voting him in.

Uuhhh, back at you 4 times. Guilty without a single piece of evidence for the last 2 years and you still have ZERO. America is where you are innocent until proven guilty, unless you are a democrat then everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent. Or if the democrats pay a foreign national for dirt, the place people under investigation they are guilty. Why? Because we placed them under investigation. Even then, they are still guilty if they do not represent what we believe in. Even then, if we catch them in the street we will beat them up or show up to their jobs demanding their job.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

You are most certainly right. Moderate republicans have been fleeing the republican party for years. Fiscal conservatives who aren't xenophobes or social conservatives have been driven away since at least 04.

I completely agree that "fear of the brown" is used as a political tool. Just look at the fact that the number of congresspeople from districts that border mexico who are in favor of da wall is zero. And yet people from Michigan and Wisconsin and the Dakotas, where immigration from the southern border is a non-issue, are the big fans.

I'm not sure what you mean about "environmentalism" as a generalization. Clean air, clean water, and fuel efficient (and much safer) vehicles are all a result of federal regulation, NOT some universal gathering of common sense. Just go back and check the number of unhealthy days in LA in the 70s vs. today (notwithstanding population growth too). Lead paint. Asbestos. water pollution. Not sure how any reasonably person can say that the environment was "greater" 40 years ago... you know, before republicans created the EPA.

Yep and they created the national park system as well as the idea of conservation. What they did not create was the will to sign over national sovereignty in the name of the environment or the current class of crony socialism that Kalifornia is perfecting where they can not get taxes out of the middle class directly so they force energy producers into fake environmental regulations where the taxes do to the state then the energy providers raise the rates on the consumers.

Sounds to me that you are absolutely for illegal immigration. Good for you. They are reported to have caught and release 100,000 in the month of March alone. If there is going to be a next hot civil war it is going to be about Illegal immigration. The people from all the other states are not going to let their elections laws be manipulated by illegals.

Originally Posted by ralph

100% agree. Enough opinions on the report nobody has read already. Let's read it and decide for ourselves how significant it is.

Yep because you and the press are certainly going to be open mind kind of people who absolutely do not cherry pick their talking points. Have fun reading through the thousands of pages or are you going to get your cliff notes from CNN? asking for a friend.

Originally Posted by 95sn

The optics are if the report completely exonerates mein grifter why are Barr, McConnel, Paul and a few more refusing to release it?

Same old story from you.
No Evidence, trump exonerated.

Okay, some evidence but not enough to prove anything!

Okay, some of that evidence led to more evidence uncovered in the House Intelligence investigation, but its still a witch hunt!

Okay, trumps a witch but there is nothing illegal about being a witch!

Okay, maybe being a witch is illegal but if it is he did not know it!

Okay, maybe he knew being a witch was illegal but he did it to save America from Clinton!

Okay, so maybe he just did it to get rich and pay off his debts to Qutar, Saudia Arabia et al and screwing you over in the process, but if he did Its your fault for voting him in.

Also, even if there was evidence. He is still getting my vote because you democrats are a way bigger enemy to our freedom than anyone else. So there is that.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Sounds to me that you are absolutely for illegal immigration. Good for you.

Because the only possible position that someone who disagrees with you can hold is that of your most extreme boogie man.

If you want to fix this issue how about turning down the vitriol knob and come to the table and (gasp!) be prepared to compromise a little. That’s certainly what I hope dems will do, and no for goodness sake we don’t need more of Betos “tear down this wall” bs.

Or you can always take it up a notch and threaten civil war, because that’s a good way to bring people around to a satisfying compromise.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Yep because you and the press are certainly going to be open mind kind of people who absolutely do not cherry pick their talking points. Have fun reading through the thousands of pages or are you going to get your cliff notes from CNN? asking for a friend.

Some of us don’t mind reading primary source docs rather than gleaning “the narrative” from WakeWorld. Try it sometime!

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

After Trump fired Comey "because of the Russia thing" (his words) and Sessions recused himself for failing to disclose several contacts with Russians before and after the campaign, Mueller was appointed to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election and related crimes discovered in the course of the investigation.

That's the story, in a sentence.

CNN's words. And who was it that was being elected that Mueller (as well as CNN and the democrats on this board) was interested in because of the alleged Russian connection ?:

A) Hillary
B) Trump
C) None of the above

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

CNN's words. And who was it that was being elected that Mueller (as well as CNN and the democrats on this board) was interested in because of the alleged Russian connection ?:



A) Hillary

B) Trump

C) None of the above

If we had the report we could speak to that. My personal suspicion from what is publicly known is that the Russians were more out to sew discord and chaos than anything else.

For instance your evident mistrust for our entire system of government will keep paying dividends far beyond 2024.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Also, even if there was evidence...

Glug glug glug this kool-aid is DELICIOUS!

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Some of us don’t mind reading primary source docs rather than gleaning “the narrative” from WakeWorld. Try it sometime!

All 30,000 or more huh? I don't have that much interest. If I am reading that, I am looking at NFL draft articles.

I already know the Cliff notes and it is a shocker. The democrats will say they found evidence in the report. The Republicans will post counter arguments that the democrats cherry picked quotes. The democrats will now say they have enough to press for impeachment. Mad Max Waters will now be the toast of the democrat party because she was the one who said from the beginning. CNN will get some ratings back because they will talk it to death. The democrats will draw the impeachment out until near the 2020 election. Trump will go on the campaign trail. There will be more reports of democrats beating up Republicans again primarily on the west coast. 95sn will tell us again he is a Republican and we will hear him drone on about how someone up for impeachment has to be guilty because we all know that if a politician places another political foe under investigation they must be guilty. We will call each other names. I will vote for Trump and so will the people who voted last time

Am I getting warm?

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Glug glug glug this kool-aid is DELICIOUS!

Right back at ya. At least I am not for actual foreign take over of the US like you.