MovieChat Forums > Politics > eYe commentary on Rudy Arrest Watch ... ...

eYe commentary on Rudy Arrest Watch ... 10/16/19

posted 5 years ago by eYeDEF (5050)
103 replies | jump to latest

According to CNN the federal probe into Rudy Giuliani includes a counter-intelligence investigation. This news, if true, is a very big deal. It is also the least surprising news we've heard all week. As we've already learned, Rudy has gone into business, literally and figuratively, with associates of the Russian election interference team from 2016. In some cases, they're not even associates but the same actual people. He wants their help to "prove" Russia and Trump were framed.

Whether this is a conspiracy or "colluding" or just maintaining robust channels of communication with the foreigners who are helping you, it's the same team they were working with four years ago. By any rational standard, of course this would draw the attention of US counter-intelligence.

What is weird is that Bill Barr apparently hasn't locked things down sufficiently to prevent it. Rumors continue to float that Rudy is about to get arrested. The problem I see with the FBI/SDNY investigation is they seem to be only focused on one lane of his influence peddling (helping Ukrainian politicians/oligarchs get deals in the US) while completely ignoring the other lane (helping Trump leverage those UKR interests for Trump’s political benefit).

They've siloed themselves and won't touch any of the Ukraine stuff that the House is investigating. Why? Because they're clearly scared shitless of Trump and Barr after everything Trump has done to root out those who dared to investigate him.

This is an ominous development and could be very bad.

The FBI and SDNY act like there's a Venn diagram between themselves and the House investigations where the two circles don't intersect or overlap. In truth, they widely overlap. The connection is Rudy. The common thread is the removal of Ambassador Yovanovitch. The Ukraine oligarchs wanted her out to make UKR nice and corrupt again to their benefit. Trump wanted her out to be able to set up the shakedown of Zelensky for the illegal in kind campaign donations.

[OT: I've repeatedly cited illegal in kind campaign contributions and extortion as the "laws broken" for the dense one known as krl97a who toils under the delusion Trump broke no laws because no one has bothered to take the time to dumb it down to him. Maybe one of you have more patience than I to clue him in, though I'm not holding my breath.]

But back on topic, right now there are two hands emerging of this investigation. SDNY/FBI is only looking at one of them with the other tied behind their back. This is frustrating.

The case against Rudy in these UKR influence peddling matters is strong. He has no savings and is entirely dependent on these foreign lobbying efforts to make ends meet. But let's keep it real. The only reason anyone talks to Bloodsucker Rudy is because he has influence with the GOP and Trump. The only reason Trump talks to Rudy is because he covers up and explains away crimes for him and carries out criminal operations to the benefit of his 2020 presidential campaign.

And because SDNY is looking only at what the right hand is doing and ignoring that there is even a left hand, nabbing Rudy now puts him in the criminal justice system with the protections of a criminal defense attorney and the 5th Amendment. It's a way to shut him up. If SDNY never asks him for information about the Trump side of his business dealings because they claim it's not part of their scope (b/c they're scared shitless of Barr) it's a way to close down or delay a liability track for Trump.

That means if Rudy is arrested, we might have a situation where Barr was given a green light to take him off the streets to shut him up behind defense counsel so that he doesn't testify against Trump. He will avail himself of fifth amendment protections.

What SDNY should be doing is sidelining Barr because he's a declared co-conspirator on the UKR matter. They should be trying to force his recusal and work with House Intel to prosecute the matters that are common to both probes and eventually be the conduit to prosecute all criminal referrals made from the House. This would extend to Pence, Mulvaney, Sondland, Rudy, Pompeo and yes Trump, WH Counsel's office (all of them) et al.

Unfortunately they don't appear to be taking what I consider the necessary required steps to work in concert with the House inquiry. Only should Trump feel the heat from the stick of criminal charges can I see him being forced to resign. What should be crystal clear and alarming to everyone right now is that Trump has been doing everything he can to rig the 2020 election to ensure he remains in power. The Dem candidates should have been hammering this point on rinse and repeat at last night's debate. Yet they did not.

[–] TexasJack (12516) 5 years ago

Hey, what happened to eYe's report for 10/15? Who gave you the day off?

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Yeah sorry I was traveling last weekend and wrote 10-14 summary morning of 10-15.

My head is still spinning from warp speed of developing stories, so that's my bad for not keeping up.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Thank you so much for your clear and concise breakdown of what’s happening. Everything is going at warped speed, it really is hard to keep up.

No wonder FOX isn’t going near this.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

concise breakdown

LOL! Is this like when you praised eyedef for his clear and concise claim that the Dayton shooter (an Antifa supporting leftist) was a "Republican" (because he misread his own posted source about a completely different story), you brown nosing buffoon?

"Thank You!

Now let's see all the T-rumptards ignore this important fact."

https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5d47d6c89f3c622265e18a9d/So-it-turns-out-that-the-Dayton-killer-is-a-leftist-Elizabeth-Warren-and-AOC-supporter-who-is-a-socialist-antifa-bro-n?reply=5d48ff641e1dc6397a3ee59a

Is that still an "important fact" for all the "T-rumptards" to know, LOL?

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

You just reminded me: best part of eYe's post is this:

[OT: I've repeatedly cited illegal in kind campaign contributions and extortion as the "laws broken" for the dense one known as krl97a who toils under the delusion Trump broke no laws because no one has bothered to take the time to dumb it down to him. Maybe one of you have more patience than I to clue him in, though I'm not holding my breath.]

Notice no one has taken the challenge to 'clue you in' ? Bwahahahahahahahaha!

Hear that sound of the big balloon deflating? There goes your sense of self-importance!

#NPD

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Yeah, I liked that part too, which is why I quoted it in my reply, moron. The call out was both flattering and amusingly inane.

https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/5da792779b5be6409beb15dc/eYe-commentary-on-Rudy-Arrest-Watch-101619?reply=5da7bb359b5be6409beb174a

Feel free to succeed where eyedef failed and cite the specific statutes I asked for all along so we can discuss all the ways they don't apply to Trump, and then, if you actually do establish he conceivably broke some law, we can discuss whether it's a "high crime" warranting the extreme act of impeachment.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

the federal probe into Rudy Giuliani includes a counter-intelligence investigation.

Rudy has gone into business, literally and figuratively, with associates of the Russian election interference team from 2016.

it's the same team they were working with four years ago. By any rational standard, of course this would draw the attention of US counter-intelligence.

Why would someone who has the kind of KNOWLEDGE RUDY has do this after he'd just WITNESSED what happen to FLYNN, MANAFORT, COHEN, etc, etc. etc. ???

Is it possible he's working in some kind of DOUBLE AGENT capacity as a way to BRING DOWN the SCAM MAN???

And WHY would BARR betray his good friend MUELLER ... unless he's also some kind of a DOUBLE AGENT ... who wants to get even with the SCAM MAN ... for the way he got MANAFORT to pretend as if he'd FLIPPED ... as a way to REPORT back to the SCAM MAN what MUELLER was doing?

And why would LINDSAY sp? who use to be GOOD PALS with McCAIN also suddenly be good buddies with the SCAM MAN???

Is it possible all of them could be doing what they do as a PAY BACK??? And if that's what's going on would it be LEGAL to do it???

Maybe that could also explain the reason why the SDNY appears to FEAR BARR???

Could BARR also be the WB???

This situation is so WEIRD that this is the only way any of it would MAKE SENSE!!!

Is if at least 2 of them (BARR and LINDSEY) are doing what they do now because they're pissed at the way the SCAM MAN MISTREATED their friends???

[–] yatzo376 (7752) 5 years ago

I wonder if Rudy will be at the Yankees playoffs?

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

At least we've been assured that all of the TESTIMONY that's taking place will be RELEASED and made AVAILABLE to the PUBLIC before the TRIAL takes place.

And it will also be INTERESTING to see which ARTICLES of IMPEACHMENT are drawn up against the SCAM MAN.

ABUSE of POWER … ???

OBSTRUCTION of JUSTICE … ???

EXTORTION … ???

CONTEMPT of CONGRESS … ???

TREASON … ??? (if he's also PUTIN'S PUPPET and they've also got TAPES and/or COPIES of the TRANSLATION NOTES of those SECRET CONVERSATIONS that he's had with PUTIN).

Intelligence Agencies would also be FOOLS not to WIRE TAP him after what he said about how he chose to BELIEVE PUTIN instead of THEM in HELSINKI.

[–] yatzo376 (7752) 5 years ago

Goddamn the scam man!!!

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

[OT: I've repeatedly cited illegal in kind campaign contributions and extortion as the "laws broken" for the dense one known as krl97a who toils under the delusion Trump broke no laws because no one has bothered to take the time to dumb it down to him. Maybe one of you have more patience than I to clue him in, though I'm not holding my breath.]

Cool. A thread op call out. I'd have hoped for a dedicated thread by now given how thoroughly I've stomped and humiliated you up and down this board over the months, but I guess for now I'll settle for this and your therapy session with those other three losers on the other thread.

I actually asked you to cite specific statutes Trump's call supposedly violated. That's the first step. "Campaign contributions" is ludicrous on its face since the campaign wasn't discussed and no money was given to Trump. And "extortion"? Apart from the call showing absolutely no extortion, and the other party denying any pressure let alone extortion, Biden is on tape literally boasting about extorting that same government. Presumably you aren't claiming Biden broke the law, being the mindless partisan hack you are, so, again, you need to get more specific.

After you've identified specific laws Trump supposedly broke, we can analyze the facts to see whether your claim has merit or is absurd.

If we somehow find your claim has merit, then we can discuss whether it rises to "high crimes" warranting impeachment. After all, Obama really did break campaign finance laws. He received a fine and it was barely covered in the media.

"President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission for campaign reporting violations — one of the largest fees ever levied against a presidential campaign.”

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/obama-fec-violation-largest-ever/

Impeachment?

[–] yatzo376 (7752) 5 years ago

Let’s watch the absurdities unfold ....

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 5 years ago

Ouch. Fakeye news gets owned again. Brutal

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

"Campaign contributions" is ludicrous on its face since the campaign wasn't discussed and no money was given to Trump."

luuuulz. Is this the latest John Solomon talking point or is this just your untreated autism rearing its ugly head once again? No, it's no one else's job to explain to you how dirt on a domestic political opponent (that we've learned was being demanded by Trump through Rudy via Rick Perry and other channels to Zelensky) is a thing of value equivalent to an illegal in kind campaign contribution. That's your brainwashing and limited intellect on exhibit. Chris Wallace, maybe the last "news" guy at Fox, understood the illegality of the demand as soon as it was reported weeks ago. Maybe you should look to him. FYI Wallace is a Republican and deeply conservative.

I used to think your problem was trying so hard to pretend you have credibility to talk on subjects that you have insufficient education to understand, but now I see it's pretty clearly brain damage. It doesn't require education to recognize self evident truths. You need to come to terms with the fact that it's your autism that prevents you from seeing it.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Still no specific laws you can cite? You're making it easy for me to expose what an ignorant blowhard you are. For those who aren't familiar with the topic here's an FEC primer on "in kind campaign donations".

https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/making-disbursements-pac/making-kind-contributions-candidates/

Campaign finance law is about finance. It involves money to the campaign. It can also restrict "goods or services" to a campaign, but the examples given are all explicit campaign activities like printing flyers, giving office supplies, etc. that campaigns normally buy. The point is to prevent people from bypassing contribution limits. It's all about money, with punishments depending on assigning dollar values to the goods or services equivalent to their normal cost.

What's the dollar value of finding out the truth on Biden's corruption?

I haven't heard specifically what Chris Wallace said but I know he's a registered Democrat and he's no legal expert. I haven't been impressed with him over the years, and it's sad that you're trying to pull him in as a substitute for your own commentary. Let's look at what Mueller said instead.

If you had read the Mueller report you'd have seen him reluctantly give this as one of the reasons for not indicting Don Jr. over the tower meeting as they explored whether it potentially violated campaign finance law:

"At the same time, no judicial decision has treated the voluntary provision of uncompensated opposition research or similar information as a thing of value that could amount to a contribution under campaign-finance law. Such an interpretation could have implications beyond the foreign-source ban…and raise First Amendment questions. Those questions could be especially difficult where the information consisted simply of the recounting of historically accurate facts." - Mueller Report, p. 187

If you feel Mueller is wrong then feel free to give the precedent for treating someone receiving uncompensated “dirt” on an opponent as a campaign finance violation. There haven’t been any legal consequences for the DNC sending Chalupa to cast a wide net looking for dirt on Trump in Ukraine, or even for the Clinton campaign, DNC, and Obama administration for soliciting dirt on Trump in the “dossier”, despite Democrats actually paying for that foreign service.

That Trump wasn’t soliciting “dirt” on a campaign opponent, unlike the Democrats, but was doing his constitutionally authorized job as president to investigate corruption, makes your moronic argument even more absurd.

Your comments about me are funny coming from the dimwit who spent months denying the Mueller report (which you wrongly claimed was "40%" redacted because you hadn't read it and lied about it) didn't clear Trump of collusion because you didn't understand what any of the involved terms meant. For a long time you didn't even know the report cleared Trump of "coordination" as well as "conspiracy". I had to educate you and it took repeated sledgehammer blows before it finally sunk in.

Your education continues.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[OT: I've repeatedly cited illegal in kind campaign contributions and extortion as the "laws broken" for the dense one known as krl97a who toils under the delusion Trump broke no laws because no one has bothered to take the time to dumb it down to him. Maybe one of you have more patience than I to clue him in, though I'm not holding my breath.]

Lord, how I've tried. he won't even acknowledge that the laws Trump broke exist.

The denial is strong in him.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

That's because Democrats won't say what these laws are. Feel free to try. Something more specific than one word like "extortion", lol. If it's really so obvious then it should be easy for you to look up and quote from the relevant laws.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

Bernie said it but he was given very little time to speak.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

The dems are frustrating me as well. They are going to snuff out Bernie again and repeat all their same mistakes in 2016 and then sit there, going: "I can't believe Trump won again!" in November.

It shouldn't be this difficult to lock down one infantile madman but they seem to be trying hard lately.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

To snuff Bernie out and throw the fight is also rigging an election that neoliberals are fine with because under trump or any republican the status quo will be maintained, which is especially important to the billionaires who run every campaign except Bernie’s as he is the sole front runner who refuses their money and truly works for the common good. I just don’t believe there are enough centrist voters to beat trump or any republican. The working class is banding together but with the MSM protecting the elites, the DNC protecting the elites, and the voter suppression we’ve seen protecting the elites, it’s an uphill battle.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I want him to win. First candidate in years I could get behind.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

He is the only honest one who truly has the common good as his overall goal.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

What will MOST LIKELY happen is LIZ WARREN (who's in the LEAD) will CHOOSE BERNIE to be her RUNNING MATE (because one also suspects that BERNIE will also come in 2nd in the PRIMARY ELECTION).

So he won't be SNUFFED OUT, but will be ELEVATED to VP, or to the POSITION where BIDEN use to be.

There's also the possibility that it could be the other way around, but with LIZ having a STEADY RISE to the TOP of the HEAP, it's probably going to end with LIZ WINNING the PRIMARY, and with BERNIE coming in behind her, and with her choosing him to RUN in the GENERAL ELECTION with her.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

MSM was cramming Warren down our throats and that gave her a big leap. They now seem to be turning on her though, to utilize a divide and conquer strategy that will allow the DNC to use its super delegates to choose Biden when no one candidate gets a majority, which I believe would be half. Biden is the most billionaire friendly.

I don’t believe Bernie would choose Warren for his VP. He would alienate his base, who are well aware of her dishonesty and her centrist history that you are unaware of bc it’s not covered on MSNBC.

I don’t think Warren would choose Bernie as her VP either. She is beholden to the special interests groups who support her and as her handlers they wouldn’t allow it. While she claims she won’t take $$ from billionaires she promises to help the DNC take their money if she is the democrat nominee and so she’s really just being a tricky lawyer and under her presidency nothing would change for the average person.
With Bernie, the comfortable people would stay comfortable, the poor would elevate and the rich wouldn’t get to hoard as much money.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

Take a look at how Bernie will tax the billionaires like no other democrat will, not to mention taking on the medical industry and you can see why he is hated by them and they’d rather have a Republican.

“ What corporations paid in federal income taxes last year:

Amazon: $0
Delta: $0
Chevron: $0
GM: $0

What they would have paid under our plan:

Amazon: $3.8 billion
Delta: $1.8 billion
Chevron: $1.6 billion
GM: $1.5 billion”

Edit: So by pushing for Biden, Democratic elites would be alienating the true progressives, the faux progressives, the people who insist having a lady president is the ultimate goal, the POC, the poor, the list goes in and on of people who will simply not vote out of sheer disgust, ensuring the GOP remains in power ensuring the protections of their money hoarding addictions.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

There's NO DOUBT about how OUTRAGEOUS it is that this kind of CRAP is going on.

Look at the way employees also SACRIFICED and gave up lots of UNION rights they had as a way to HELP bring GM back from the BRINK of NON EXISTENCE during THE MELTDOWN back in 2008.

And what kind of THANKS do they get for it??? For WORKING OVER TIME, and HELPING bring the company back from the BRINK???

They get NO THANKS, are told the company plans to REPLACE them with WORKERS who make less money, etc. etc. etc. which is also the reason for the STRIKE that's also been costing that COMPANY something like a MILLION OR BILLION BUCKS each day.

Anyhow, since LIZ and BERNIE basically also have the SAME KIND of VIEWS in regards to this TAXATION matter, this is also the reason why they'd make such good RUNNING MATES.

Because LIZ is just as DISGUSTED by this matter as BERNIE.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

I’m going to start a new thread called Democratic Frontrunners. We’ve highjacked this thread!

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

*Sigh*

It's really sounding more and more like that fat hog might just do what he has (undeservedly) done his entire life: dodge another bullet even though the bullet is a heat seeking variety that even a chimpanzee could bullseye and ALL because all the people involved are inept.

*Sigh*

This p!sses me off. I wholeheartedly believe this a$$hole could win again. In fact--I'm expecting it, really.

They're going about this all wrong just like we feared they would.

I tell you--if Donald manages to dodge such damning and in-your-face evidence AND get re-elected then this will be one for the history books.

Really p!sses me off how life is full of rotten a$$holes like Trump who go their whole lives doing nothing but evil and somehow dodge every bullet and die old, rich and comfortable.

Did this guy make a deal with the devil or something? Sure feels this way sometimes. 73 years old, fat and old, yet has no health issues whatsoever despite stuffing his face with fast food. Commits crimes so blatantly and suffers no consequences. Commits staggering amounts of evil and is surrounded by people calling him "a gift from God".

It's frustrating, you know? Good people are suffering out there and history repeats itself by adoring another evil psychopath who is apparently answerable to no one. And the most frustrating part is that it seems that, by all accounts, it would be EASY to crush this guy if only the people involved DID THE RIGHT THING.

We'll see what happens but I'm losing hope in something positive coming from this.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

Take a deep breath! It’ll be okay. What comes around goes around but the order of the universe sometimes takes eons to unfold.

That said, I think trump will die a horrible death like many mobsters do who become cornered as he seems to be.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

LOL! It's OK--I'm not as upset as it looks. More frustrated than anything else by the lack of such an obvious conman being brought to justice.

If this one buffoon could usurp our system to the degree that Donald has, imagine was a smart guy could do.

It's food for thought.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

It’s terrifying and I’ve thought and said the same. It’s a broken system. Check out this AOC video on this very subject. https://twitter.com/jkcorden/status/1093634176845139968?s=21

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

The only reason his HEALTH ISSUES have been KEPT in CHECK is because he's taking STATINS for his HIGH CHOLESTEROL LEVELS.

But STATINS also cause all kinds of other HEALTH problems. NOTE the way the SCAM MAN has troubles trying to CLIMB or DESCEND DOWN a STAIRCASE.

And This could be a result of the MEDICATION he's taking (which is also a result of his STUFFING his MOUTH FULL of FAST FOOD).

Because STATINS also have SIDE EFFECTS that can EFFECT the MUSCLES that one needs to use to be able to CLIMB a STAIRCASE:

You can also see that's the case from what it says about this STATIN which is also subscribed to many people with HIGH CHOLESTEROL COUNTS:

Lipitor side effects (oral)

This drug may rarely cause muscle problems . Tell your doctor right away if you develop any of these symptoms during treatment and if these symptoms persist after your doctor stops this drug:

Muscle pain/tenderness/weakness

Signs of kidney problems

This medication may rarely cause liver problems. If you notice any of the following rare but serious side effects, tell your doctor right away:

Yellowing eyes/skin

Dark urine

Severe stomach/abdominal pain

Persistent nausea/vomiting

So whereas you see him as being able to DODGE a BULLET, what I see is A TICKING TIME BOMB that could EXPLODE at any moment.

Add on the HUGE AMOUNT of STRESS that he's UNDER NOW with the IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS and the DISASTER that he's caused for the KURDS, and that also makes the TIME BOMB that's TICKING away inside of him that much more LIKELY to GO OFF.

And with his being SO GROSSLY OVERWEIGHT and ADVANCED in AGE, that also makes it LESS LIKELY that he'd be able to SURVIVE and ENDURE QUADRUPLE BY PASS HEART SURGERY the way CLINTON did when he was still in office and was also still only in his 50's at the time.

So HANG in there because my prediction is KARMA is rapidly CATCHING UP with the SCAM MAN now and you probably also won't have much longer to wait before it KNOCKS on his DOOR.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Let's hope.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

Do you think there would be many people showing up at his FUNERAL the way they did when McCAIN died???

Would the CLINTONS or the OBAMAS be there or DECLINE to go if they were sent an invitation???

Would BUSH want to be there after the way the SCAM MAN MISTREATED his BROTHER who ran against him in the PRIMARY???

My guess is those who CLAIM to SUPPORT him now probably also wouldn't give a HOOT about him either once he's gone.

And FORMER PRESIDENT CARTER (who's a TRUE CHRISTIAN and not just a FAKE ONE) would probably be the only former POTUS who would attend.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

You people are rooting for President Trump to die? Wow.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

CORRECTION:

DISCUSSING the REALITY of a situation and the FACTS of his HEALTH ISSUES isn't ROOTING for someone to DIE.

It's merely a matter of FACING the FACTS of LIFE and the CONSEQUENCES that can come from ABUSING one's body by STUFFING it FULL of FAST FOODS that are BAD for you.

As you may recall, THE SCAM MAN also DICTATED and FORCED a DOCTOR to write a RIDICULOUS LETTER for him where he BRAGS about having EXCELLENT HEALTH and being the MOST HEALTHY PRESIDENT ever.

But COPIES of his MEDICAL RECORDS also INDICATE that is NOT the case, due to the way he's taking STATINS (which are prescribed for people who are OVER WEIGHT and/or have HIGH CHOLESTEROL LEVELS ... which can also be caused by being OBESE ... the way the SCAM MAN is … even though he also LIED about his HEIGHT and his WEIGHT as a way to try and HIDE and COVER UP that FACT).

This is the PROBLEM with him.

HE REFUSES to FACE FACTS ...

TRIES to DENY the REALITY of SITUATIONS …

which is also the reason why KARMA will come CALLING on HIM …

the same way as it also pays the rest of us a VISIT as well …

each time we try do something or we try to DENY doing something that we've done that is BAD for us.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Actually Trump seems very healthy. He's strong and amazingly robust and energetic...really for any age...let alone his own. He's indefatigable. Trump so thrives on the high pressure of being president that he's the first one I've seen who hasn't visibly aged rapidly this far in. Even liberal news outlets have commented on that.

But it certainly sounds like you're hoping he dies. Calling it "karma" means you feel it's deserved. In fact you're fantasizing about it, and rubbing your hands at the prospect of no one going to his funeral.

dteam6 even responded to your speculative post by saying "Let's hope." Quite sick.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Hoping Donald's Karma catches up to him does not equate to hoping he will die. It means precisely what it means.

Furthermore, the way you cling to "key words" in posts like a leach on someone's ass is quite pitiful. You're starving for SOMETHING. ANYTHING.

Pathetic. :)

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

His "karma" post was entirely fantasizing about Trump dying. Your entire reply to it was "Let's hope." Why lie with these pathetic denials? If you don't want to rethink or retract your comments just embrace them. At this point you likely can't do much about your stupidity, but you don't have to be a coward.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Trump so thrives on the high pressure of being president that he's the first one I've seen who hasn't visibly aged rapidly this far in.

The man walks around with orange make-up on his face, his eyes powdered in white and a toupee which looks like a rat's nest. How can you make a judgement on him 'not visibly aging rapidly' when his appearance is so altered, and has been since he started campaigning four years ago?

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

Imagine if someone THREW a BUCKET of WATER on him or DUNKED his HEAD down into one (like one does when one BOBS for APPLES at a HALLOWEEN party).

Or IMAGINE what he'd look like in the SHOWER or if he went SWIMMING.

What you'd see is his BALD HEAD, because it's also that COMB OVER RAT'S NEST that sits on top of his HEAD (that creates the FALSE ILLUSION that he has HAIR) that would probably also DROOP down the SIDES of his HEAD once that thing GOT WET.

Thus also REVEALING how he's NOTHING MORE than A BALD FAT MAN (because his DAUGHTER also explained how he'd had SURGERY on his SCALP to PULL it together as a way to try and HIDE his BALDNESS).

As for being HEALTHY, he's UNHEALTHY both MENTALLY (NARCISSISM) and PHYSICALLY.

PHYSICALLY he's OVERWEIGHT, and CLINGS TO THE RAILING each time that he ACCENDS or DESCENDS a STAIRCASE (which is also the reason why he RODE that ELEVATOR back when he announced he was running for office as a way to HIDE that FACT).

Because he also has to GRAB HOLD of the RAILING as a way to get up or down a STATIONARY STAIRCASE (which is also a CHORE for him to ACCOMPLISH due to his being so GROSSLY OVERWEIGHT).

And If you compare what he looks like now to what he looks like in that HOLLYWOOD VIDEO where he BRAGS about GRABBING the PRIVATE PARTS of WOMEN, one can also see how he HASN'T AGED well at all for his AGE.

And one also said that one SUSPECTS a "TRUE CHRISTIAN" like CARTER would attend his FUNERAL (thus also making your FALSE CLAIM that it was said NO ONE would attend it without MERIT).

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I've seen video of a gust of wind blowing his hair as he was climbing the stairs into AF1. He doesn't have any hair on the back of his head! I mean NONE. The wind blew and the BACK of his head opened with a lock of 30" long hair flapping in the breeze, revealing a bald head. I have NO idea where he's combing hair over from. I'd always assumed the back but that's not the case.

Even Einstein would be able to solve the Donald Trump Combover equation.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

Yeah Bill Maher also showed a clip of that on his show and said how WEIRD it was and pointed out how he also couldn't figure out where the HAIR on TOP of his head was coming from.

What he might be doing is using that TOPIX stuff that they advertise on TV. Have you seen it???

It's some kind of STUFF in a BOTTLE that you can SPRINKLE on top of your head that CLINGS to whatever hair you still have left to make it LOOK THICKER.

So perhaps that's what's on TOP of his HEAD???

Stuff from inside of a BOTTLE???

Or maybe it's also part of a WIG that he GLUES on top of his head???

I'd still LOVE to see someone UNEXPECTEDLY DRENCH him with a BUCKET of WATER, or SHOVE him into a SWIMMING POOL then take PHOTOS of what he looks like SOAKING WET.

:)

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

LOL!!!

Tgat would be great. XD

The irony is that a toupee would actually look BETTER than that mop on his head.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Not to mention the fact that his face is growing redder (high blood pressure?) and he's gained a LOT of weight since 2016.

His head is so goddamn big now that the article pictures can't even fit his fat head in them anymore and just resort to showing a closeup of his ugly face.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

He's gained a LOT of weight since 2016 - the photos show it. He's gotten huge - or as he says, "youge'.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Nasty...

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Very!

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Looks the same to me, and as I said liberal pundits like Chris Cuomo agree, though he's trying to attack Trump for not aging, claiming it shows he doesn't care as much as other presidents or some lame garbage like that:

"CNN anchor Fredo Chris Cuomo said that President Donald Trump simply may not care as much about the country as his predecessors, because he hasn't visibly aged as much as they did. On Tuesday, August 20, Cuomo remarked on Cuomo Prime Time, CNN's top-rated show, "It's been almost three years since Trump won the presidency. He looks exactly the same....."

Cuomo then exhibited side-by-side photos of Obama, former president George W. Bush, and former president Bill Clinton. The first was of each man before taking office and the second of each after leaving office. Of these, Cuomo noted: "I mean come on, look at Clinton's hair — went white. George W. Bush looks like he got a beat down. Obama looks like his own grandfather ... this is a very hard job because of the stress they carry with them."

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/cnns_chris_cuomo_bizarrely_criticizes_trump_for_not_visibly_aging.html

I get a kick out of watching you clowns bump into each other and stumble around.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

By the way, krl97a--have you told Donald how you feel? Seriously, this post reads like a love letter. Maybe you have a chance. Take a shot! See what happens!

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Nope. Keep that ball spinning, though.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

LOL!

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

krl97a strawmans so much that he literally IS a strawman.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Yah he really needs to come to terms with the fact that he is literally too stupid to be having the conversations he is demanding to have. When he can't even acknowledge basic self evident facts like the things be reported and transpiring in the news right now, he's exhibiting that he is an invalid and will be treated likewise.

It is infinitely amusing to watch him feebly accuse everyone else of being unable to explain to him why a fact is a fact. With that at least he finally got something right. He suffers from a mental disability that prevents him from comprehending what should be obvious.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

LOL! If Trump IS ousted, I'd love to see this kid's posts in regards to that.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

OMG - can you believe the meltdown this kid will have right here on the forum? His NPD will not be able to tolerate such news.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Let's have the popcorn ready. :)

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

You're already half melting down on this thread because you're depressed over the prospect of Trump not going down. What are you going to be like when this goes away like the Russian collusion hoax and Trump's still in power?

I'm already chomping on popcorn. This is hilarious.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

When he can't even acknowledge basic self evident facts like the things be reported and transpiring in the news right now,

"At the same time, no judicial decision has treated the voluntary provision of uncompensated opposition research or similar information as a thing of value that could amount to a contribution under campaign-finance law. Such an interpretation could have implications beyond the foreign-source ban…and raise First Amendment questions. Those questions could be especially difficult where the information consisted simply of the recounting of historically accurate facts." - Mueller Report, p. 195

LOL! Try again, moron.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

You're quoting from the Mueller Report to vindicate Trump crimes happening now right in front of your face? (facepalm)

Jesus you really are brain damaged.

Mueller's opinions aren't canon and haven't been tested in court. Most people recognize that oppo research is a thing of value.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

You can't even cite what laws are supposedly being broken, you drooling idiot. We've debunked your vague "campaign contribution" claim. Got anything else?

Edit in response to yours: So you concede Mueller is right about there being no precedent for treating "dirt" as a campaign finance violation. Got it.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

lulz. It's not my job to explain to you why water is wet. If you can't see it after being told, it's because you're too brain damaged to recognize it.

Mueller himself is not even saying it's not a thing of value, just that there's been no court case where the question has ever been adjudicated. It doesn't matter though since everyone expects that it will be when tested in court because everyone knows oppo research is a thing of value that campaigns pay thousands of dollars for.

It's really sad that you're clearly too stupid to understand this distinction because like I keep telling you the subject matter is beyond your grasp.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Mueller himself is not even saying it's not a thing of value, just that there's been no court case where the question has ever been adjudicated.

Actually, agree with him or not, he also said this, as I just quoted:

"At the same time, no judicial decision has treated the voluntary provision of uncompensated opposition research or similar information as a thing of value that could amount to a contribution under campaign-finance law. Such an interpretation could have implications beyond the foreign-source ban…and raise First Amendment questions. Those questions could be especially difficult where the information consisted simply of the recounting of historically accurate facts." - Mueller Report, p. 187

Did I mention you're a moron with atrocious reading comprehension? Mueller makes a sound and obvious point. In fact he understates it.

Treating such information as a campaign contribution would mean we'd have to give the same treatment to media outlets and anyone else exercising free speech in our democracy, like CNN's daily hit pieces on Trump. It would be absurd.

The notion of treating an elected president doing his constitutionally authorized duty to investigate a specific corruption case (not even asking, "Say...do you got any dirt on Biden, Warren, or my other potential opponents?"), is eyedef level stupid.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

OMG you're really clowning yourself thinking that portion you highlighted has anything to do with the fact that oppo research is irrefutably a thing of value that campaigns pay thousands of dollars for.

Your entire argument of "broken no laws" is contingent of your silly idea that oppo research is not a thing of value. Simple common sense tells us otherwise and Mueller himself is not even saying that. Your reading comprehension is just too poor to recognize the distinction.

The rest of your babble is your borked and delusional interpretation of what Mueller said, not what he actually said. He only noted it *could* raise first amendment questions if weaponized oppo research is not clearly distinguished from "recounting historical facts". He was not asserting that it *did* nor that these questions were insurmountable should the courts adequately address this distinction.

Like I said, you're in over your ahead. Your reading comprehension prevents you from even understanding what Mueller himself even wrote. It's not my job to explain to you why water is wet.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Gee, if everyone agrees that damaging info on an opponent is a form of campaign contribution, as you allege, one would have thought it had been treated as such by the courts at some point. At least once. After all, we've been doing elections for a long time in this country. But no. And rightly so, partly for the reasons Mueller gave (that you missed with your poor reading comprehension, hence my bolded repost).

I moved the "cite specific law" hurdle out of the way to help you, but you just crashed over the "establish Trump's actions broke said law" hurdle and faceplanted. You can't even get to the last hurdle, which is arguing that even if he somehow broke a campaign finance law it's a "high crime" meriting impeachment. Especially given Obama's historically high fine for actual campaign finance violations which no one bothered to impeach him over and the media barely covered:

"President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission for campaign reporting violations — one of the largest fees ever levied against a presidential campaign.”

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/obama-fec-violation-largest-ever/

You really do suck at this eyedef. You're not a bright person, your knowledge base is scant, and you have no idea what you're talking about. You combine that with a dishonest, unscrupulous character. That's why you're my favorite punching bag. ;)

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

lulz. Citing the law is simple. That would be 52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals. It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election. Your entire argument is contingent on your idiotic notion that oppo research is not a thing of value. Like I said, Mueller never claimed oppo research did not have value, he just said there *could* be first amendment questions should the distinction between weaponized oppo research and "recounting historical facts" not be clearly defined. The fact you failed to address this refutation of your argument proves how this whole subject is miles over your head and it's a waste of time for me to always beat you over the head with facts you don't understand.

But now you're really grasping for straws trying to desperately deflect from your inadequacy by bringing up Obama campaign violations. It shows once again how you're such a bitter little John Solomon fake news goon reaching for a hail mary when you know you've lost on the facts.

So I'll go ahead and take your inability to form a coherent argument and crying Obama as an invitation to take my victory lap and conclude reading any more of your incoherent gibberish. What is a source of eternal amusement is watching how hard you work at spitting insults as if I could be insulted by a kid trying so hard to talk about a subject he so clearly knows nothing about. Nah, all that evokes from me is pity. 8)

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

I'm glad you finally found the law governing campaign contributions by foreigners. Too bad it wasn't until after we had already debunked your whole "campaign finance" angle, lol.

I've educated you on multiple things here. We've established that there's NO precedent for treating damaging information about an opponent as an election campaign contribution (my actual argument). The law prohibits money or a thing of value "in connection with a Federal, State, or local election". This had no connection to an election.

Campaign finance laws don't exist to prevent the exchange of political information in a free society. Your insane twisting of Meuller's comments are gibberish that reflect both your poor reading comprehension and dishonesty. He was actually saying that treating any such information as a campaign contribution could create irreconcilable conflicts with the First Amendment, "especially" (not only) if they were "accurate facts" (and Trump is seeking accurate facts, of a crime to boot). That's quite a concession from a biased prosecutor who really wanted to nail Trump.

That was about the tower meeting. Calling the Ukraine call a campaign contribution is even stupider because Trump was literally doing his job as president. You don't get immunity because you decide to run for office. And by your logic every media report, public endorsement, or even chat among citizens could constitute an illegal campaign contribution. So could every investigation, including those Obama launched against Trump.

You didn't actually address the fact about Obama's true campaign violation, which resulted in a fine, not impeachment. You just spent a paragraph crying about me mentioning it.

It's funny that you spew so many paragraphs of lame insults (e.g. "John Solomon"?), which is what most of your replies are, devoid of any cogent arguments. As much as you pathetically puff yourself up, you really are in over your head. You lost this debate when it started.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

Dude, the thing is that Trump has made so many grievous political errors over the past 3 months. Literally anything is possible when it's clear he's at the point of a narcissistic breakdown. Nancy owned him hard in yesterday's meeting and presser, she could barely contain her glee when Schumer was trying to describe what happened.

Trump then followed that up with a total self-own publishing a photo on twitter intending to show "nervous Nancy" Pelosi losing control. Yet it immediately backfired, with scores of political observers pointing out the picture actually made Pelosi look commanding and in control while Trump's facial contortions made it clear he was the one who was really losing his shit.

LOOOLZ! That photo will now live in infamy as an iconic moment of his presidency.

He knows Nancy is going to impeach him and he can't stop it. He knows he's being tagged with letting ISIS go free. The Syria thing has really messed him up along with Ukraine. She called him out with 'all roads lead to Putin' to his face, something no GOPer would ever dare tell him. That was the catalyst that drove him to go ape shit. There's nothing he can do to avoid the stain of blame and worthlessness. Ask any shrink, the fear of being exposed as a failure and a fraud is every narcissist's worst nightmare. Trump knows that's what's happening to him right now on the bigliest stage of all: before the ENTIRE WORLD.

I still say you should just relax and enjoy the spectacle of an administration in free fall. With more impulsive acts, anything is possible, including an impulsive resignation or other form of self harm.

[–] joi2049 (5625) 5 years ago

After the MEETING where he called NANCY a 3RD RATE POLITICIAN, and she replied back saying she WISHED he was A POLITICIAN, she also told the PRESS that she PRAYED for him due to the way she could see how he was having a SERIOUS MELTDOWN.

Then this MORNING on MORNING JOE they also said the SCAM MAN has TWEETED a message saying he PRAYED for NANCY because she was SICK MENTALLY.

Thus still another example of the way the SCAM MAN is so FOND of the USE of PROJECTION where he ACCUSES OTHERS of being the way that he is HIMSELF.

So just like a MOVIE PROJECTOR PROJECTS an IMAGE onto a BLANK SCREEN, the SCAM MAN also PROJECTS what's the matter with HIM OUTWARDS onto NANCY.

LAST NIGHT on THE LAST WORD, the host of that show also said any KID in ELEMENTARY SCHOOL could also IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZE what's going on in that PHOTO and how NANCY is POINTING at the SCAM MAN because of the way he's being SCOLDED for his WRONG DOING.

So from this point forwards, KIDS in the FUTURE will probably also be looking at that PHOTO whenever they STUDY their HISTORY LESSONS.

:)

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

Just amazes me that "Christians" support this buffoon and his bullying behavior. I know a few people at work who profess to be "Christians". They talk about the bible constantly and "the love of the lord"...then go on to talk about Donald Trump and how they feel he is "being treated unfairly". Yes, they actually believe that. They even said: "I think demons have descended on DC and are going after President Trump".

I mean...you just can't make this sh!t up.

[–] chilone (18315) 5 years ago

You clearly have no idea what Christianity is. That said, there a lot of Christians who know nothing about their own faith, also. YES, YES, YES! T-rump is flawed. Worse than some, better than some. Name me ONE of your liberal icons who isn't and don't bother trying to say "yeah but, but, but, they're not as bad as T-rump. No one knows the evil in man's hearts. Sorry to use the masculine term for humanity that's been used for millennia. Get over it or go have a cry. I don't care.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I know, I know--I'm just frustrated because we've been down this road so many times: Donald seems to be in deep trouble...a bunch of sh!t happens...suddenly he's "totally vindicated" and just goes on like nothing happened. I'm just worried about the same thing happening here.

He messed with our elections once--nothing indicates he won't do it again.

McConnell is unwavering and Barr is pulling all kinds of wild strings.

I guess I'm just worried this administration has become corrupt to the point of being bulletproof--that Donald is somehow fortified.

The way the republicans keep on defending this guy and shrugging off absolutely staggering and even unprecedented presidential crimes really worries me.

Mulveney just admits to a quid pro quo today and says: "Get over it". I mean...what the fck?

I guess my point is that I'm concerned we've crossed the point of no return.

I'm just calling it like I see it: all this "he'll be ousted any day now" and here we are on Year 3.

So that's my worry--that Donald is well-insulated no matter HOW guilty he starts to look. Am I wrong? I'd love to be wrong.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

That "total vindication" nonsense was from the Mueller probe and Barr's subsequent utterly dishonest prerelease spin on it.

But the current investigation from the impeachment inquiry is an entirely different animal because all the revelations and discoveries are out in the open and in realtime as opposed to the evidence uncovered by Mueller who, due to the nature of judicial investigations, was required by law to keep secret.

Suffice to say, he just doesn't have the option of spinning "total vindication" anymore now that he's under the spotlight of a real congressional investigation backed up by the subpoena power of an impeachment inquiry.

BTW, the Mulvaney admission that he held up aid over the crackpot DNC server conspiracy was golden.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

As for the DOJ under Barr, let me offer a little ray of hope.

Evan Perez on CNN just tweeted how a senior DOJ official told him "If the White House was withholding aid in regards to the cooperation of any investigation at the Department of Justice, that is news to us."

This is the DOJ trying to do a CYA. They rejected TWO criminal referrals on the Ukraine matter without interviewing a single soul.

Now Mulvaney has admitted to actions which constitute material facts that should satisfy the elements of the specific crimes ICIG and the CIA GC outlined in their referrals to DOJ!!!

Per DOJ rules, they are required at this point to reopen the case.

I have no idea who the "Senior DOJ official" is, but I think we can make a very good guess that it's someone who wants to get distance from Barr because Barr is fucking up the rep of the institution. You can bend to a leader's will to a certain extent but not break in a Democracy. Barr is out on that limb and he's destroying the DOJ.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I hope you're right and they push Barr out.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

This really is key. I've been saying for awhile now that for Trump to go, Barr must be marginalized. But it's really not as insurmountable as it might sound. The recusal rules and conflict of interest rules clearly apply to him. It's a question of courage and political will. All it takes is for the SDNY to step up and say "we're far enough along in this Rudy investigation to say that it ties to the White House and we have to take the whistleblower claims seriously. Therefore, to avoid the appearance of a conflict, AG Barr must recuse." Game Over. Barr has absolutely no leg to stand on legally, no way to spin his way out of such an unequivocal statement put out by SDNY. But it does require someone there to be the face of that resistance.

Maybe what began with the CIA whistleblower will be contagious. Barr is too far out ahead of his skis, and people look at his aggressiveness and get intimidated. Look at the skis and the thinness of the ice. Strike there.

And that Evan Perez quote from a "Senior DOJ official" is a clear indication of the cracks in that ice. Barr can be marginalized by a mutiny of sorts within DOJ, someone must be willing to stand up. Maybe it's whoever this official is.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

Well put! Narcs are the worst.

Is it possible he could flee? I’m sure he’s stashing money in preparation for an asset freeze. But if he fled he’d be at the mercy of his protectors which would obviously be his downfall as there is nothing likeable about him other than the favors he provides which would be dried up.

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

That would be a spectacle for the ages wouldn't it? A President of the United States trying to flee his own Justice Department? :)

Can't see it happening while Barr is in charge since he was hired to be Trump's consigliere. Remember how much Trump despised Jeff Sessions because he was unwilling to be his Roy Cohn? Barr took the job knowing that he was being hired to be Trump's Roy Cohn.

That's why Barr needs to be marginalized. He's who is protecting Trump from prosecution.

But even if Barr were marginalized I don't expect to see Trump fleeing while he still holds the most valuable commodity of all that he can use to barter for his freedom from future prosecution: the office of the presidency. But he could be forced to resign in exchange for such an agreement. That would require we have a DoJ willing to uphold the rule of law and hold him accountable for the criminal referrals that have already been made that Barr is refusing to prosecute.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

LOL! This should be the titled "The Leftist Fantasy Thread". Endless paragraphs of wishful thinking about Rudy getting arrested, Trump becoming a fugitive, Trump dying, etc..

Maybe on this thread Hillary won in 2016, "woke" Batwoman's ratings aren't a dumpster fire, and the Soviets won the Cold War!

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

lulz. And right on cue, krl97a appears incoherently babbling about 2016 and batwoman. Seek help, the psychiatric kind.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

My post was only "incoherent" to someone with atrocious reading comprehension, lol. You more than qualify.

PS - Can your next fantasy include something about Pelosi turning into a dragon? Maybe add a wizard to spice up the plot?

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

lulz. Watching you incoherently babble about dragons, batwoman, and Pelosi has been amusing. Please continue describing your nightmare.

Good times.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Well y'all have Trump fleeing the country as a fugitive and then dying, and we're supposed to be vigilantly waiting to watch Rudy Giuliani get arrested. I just figured you might want to spice the fairy tales up even more while we sat and waited.

Has Rudy been arrested yet?

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

lolz. I guess you missed one of the thrusts of my main post, which is that it's to our collective benefit for Rudy NOT to be arrested. The longer he's out roaming around and running his mouth the better.
He's been an absolute goldmine so far and the House investigations would not be where they are right now without his assistance.

He really is turning into both the villain and the inadvertent whistleblower in his own narrative.

Oh, and BTW, Charlotte asked if I could see Trump trying to flee and I said no and explained why. It's hilarious how you somehow got a narrative about wizards and dragons out of reading it. You really have lost all credibility with your incoherent babble kid.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Your "main post" was a wandering mess of speculative babble. I didn't say anything about whether you want Rudy arrested, only noted your prediction, and you and another poster had a multi-paragraph long exchange about the possibility of Trump becoming a fugitive. It's hilarious how far Democrats' fantasies are diverging from reality.

Your thread title says "Rudy Arrest Watch". So can we expect that any minute now?

[–] eYeDEF (5050) 5 years ago

lulz. I never predicted Trump would be a fugitive, although I'm sure that's what you believe because your reading comprehension is highly lacking. That's why I had to explain to you how that's not what I said and you missed my point entirely about Rudy. In doing so you clowned yourself ... again, and it was hilarious.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

I never said you "predicted Trump would be a fugitive", so that's actually another example of your terrible reading comprehension, you clown. I'm mocking you morons for spending paragraphs discussing the possibility, like something third graders might do.

Has Rudy been arrested yet or does the watch continue?

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Now parts of the leftist fantasy thread have Pence removed and Skeletor's Daughter becoming president. Maybe someone can create a virtual reality for you people to spend your days in where some of these things happen, since they won't in real life.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

I meant if he and Pence were removed from office and he faced criminal charges lol. Isn’t that a very real possibility still?

Wouldn’t Pelosi replace his appointees?

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

Yes, I believe she is next in line after Pence.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

She is.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I still say you should just relax and enjoy the spectacle of an administration in free fall.

Personally, with all that's going on and the bombs dropping every day - I find it hard to relax. It has made me anxious watching the cable news shows each night.

[–] chilone (18315) 5 years ago

You can have an antifa circle jerk and watch unbiased CNN.

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

Its obvious you yourself do not actually care about Antifa by the way you use it to troll.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I don't think any of them really care about Antifa. They lean on it as a "See? You guys have your hate groups, too!" angle to try to absolve themselves of the glaring tumor on their party: Neo NAZIs and klansmen.

It's really that simple. It's the closest modern "equivalent" they can find to peg on the dems. Their own way of trying to wash some of the Neo Nazi/White Nationalist stains off their party by dragging dems down with: "Well, you guys have Antifa!".

It's pathetic, really. It's another way of saying: "But Hillary!" but replacing "Hillary" with "Antifa". It's a childish tactic they use to try to "absolve" themselves with a "see? You guys do it, too!" defense.

Stupid, pathetic but true--it's what they do.

It's why they also deflect to Hillary all the time--they just NEED to peg a "criminal" on the dem side in order to try to draw attention away from Donald.

I guess no one ever taught the Trumpers that "two wrongs don't make a right".

[–] chilone (18315) 5 years ago

More lies from the serial liar. Like I've said, I condemn ALL hate groups and anyone caught participating in their violence should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

[–] NormaAndNorman (3900) 5 years ago

They also claim the KKK is from the right when it's really from the left along with Antifa and BLM.

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

The KKK does come from today's right. The reason the KKK started out as "democratic" is because it had support from the majority of the country. The democratic party always sides with the majority's opinion.

Slavery is one of the rare time that the majority was wrong, and the republic (one representative speaking for many) was correct.

Over time, opinions changed, and the democratic party followed right along with those opinions which is why they heavily oppose the KKK.

But of course, you don't want to hear any of this. You want to live in your fantasy world where "leftists" created the KKK.

[–] ultravioletx (10237) 5 years ago

Agreed. Even the Proud Boys were under fire for being more violent than Antifa. Gavin McInnes tried to play it off that his violent rhetoric was satirical, but it got so bad he had to denounce his own hate group.

The real reason they talk about Antifa is because there's no clear definition of what it is. It allows Trumpers to link any critic of Trump to it. Which has become shillone's shtick lately. It has kinda replaced George Soros as the alt-right's boogeyman.

[–] dteam6 (5073) 5 years ago

I have to be honest, I went a full year of hearing Trumpers mention "Soros" online without having a fcking clue what they were talking about. When I finally had enough and decided to find out, I legitimately burst out laughing and put my hand to my mouth.

I mean...wow...

It's as if they think this guy is some sort of Illuminati/Syndicate/X-Files Smoking Man type figure who is orchestrating all these "planned attacks" against Trump. Billions and billions of dollars being spent on "elaborate acts" to "unseat Trump".

That Soros must be the richest man in the world, I tell you!

And the Trumpers who believe this think the very THOUGHT of Donald being in bed with Russians is "just crazy!". LOL! The tinfoil hats are in no short supply in the house of the average Trump supporter.

[–] krl97a (5619) 5 years ago

Gavin McInnes tried to play it off that his violent rhetoric was satirical, but it got so bad he had to denounce his own hate group.

Liar. He repeatedly pointed out their talk of fighting is about self defense, which is undeniably true. And I've never heard him "denounce" the Proud Boys, which is the opposite of a "hate group". He said he separated from the group because people were using him to attack them, but he still talks them up as a great club.

BTW, chilone is absolutely right. Antifa is responsible for most of the political violence in the country and it really is a domestic terrorist group. The false equivalence with "Nazis", who don't exist as a meaningful movement in the US and certainly don't churn out thousands of masked thugs for violent mob actions like Antifa does, and this clumsy pretense by some leftists here of not knowing who or what they are is a terrible tactic. If you were smart you'd denounce them alongside Nazis and any other totalitarian group.

[–] CharlotteXavier (2357) 5 years ago

Don't watch any cable news. It's all biased.

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 5 years ago

Another fake news orgasm from eyetard lemming. Glad he’s long gone.

It’s important to review the countless occasions in which the Democrat party media and their lemmings cooked up bullshit propaganda that turned out to be complete lies.

Remember this tomorrow when you hear gaslighting terms like storm troopers and secret police.

Can’t wait for November.