Dems taunt Trump with threats of prison time

When the Donald gets re-elected the Senate is likely to change hands.
Americans are not happy with the GOP at the moment.
So, again, 14 investigations in congress, 15 more at state level.
House democrats aren't the only bureaucrats politically posturing themselves by wasting tax dollars on investigations going nowhere. All of these venues are blue states, and all are also trying to gerrymander the electoral college. Creating a perception is easy, proving a conspiracy isn't. It's even harder without confirmation that a law has been violated. The Senate isn't changing hands, Americans rejected the democratic bid in 2018.
 
We shall, however, continue to slowly drag his ass through the mud, tied by his ankles to a horse and wagon until that fine day.


Bank fucking that. ;)

The truth is Donald Trump drags his own presidency through the mud- just as he drags his cult following through the mud with him.

Donald Trump and his ship of fools seem to be at war with everyone in the world but N. Korea, Russia, and Saudi Arabia- You Know, the countries that have threatened to attack us with nuclear weapons, the country behind the 9/11 attacks, and the country that interfered in our election to help him win.
 
Are the rules the same for Obama and Trump?



"Will He Be Dragged For Treason? Obama Accepted Unsolicited Intelligence From A Foreign Source During 2016 Election


The liberal media went nuts. The Democrats had what was to be their 10,000thmeltdown over something President Trump did or said. In this case, it would his remarks about accepting dirt on his opponent from foreign sources, which he said during an interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, a former Clinton political operative. Trump said it’s called opposition research. This isn’t anything new. It’s amazing, the gaslighting effort the Left is deploying on this front. It’s not shocking because…Hillary Clinton did it. The Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS, who then hired ex-MI6 spook Christopher Steele to compile the document known as the Trump dossier; Democrats footed the bill for this operation.

The dossier was trash. The Mueller report debunked it, but at the time, it was a political opposition research document. It also cited sources still active in the Kremlin. And this information, shoddy and unverified, was used to secure a FISA spy warrant against Carter Page, a former foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign. So, no, accepting dirt on your opponent from a foreign source did happen. It does happen. And even Obama accepted unsolicited advice from a foreign source during the 2016 election relating to Trump-Russia collusion. John Solomon of The Hill has more:

In July 2016, the Obama administration accepted unsolicited information from Alexander Downer, an Australian diplomat who just happened to have helped arrange a $25 million government donation to the Clinton Foundation years before. Downer said that he had witnessed a Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, bragging about some dirt that the Russians supposedly had on Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

Though Downer’s claim was reported two-plus months after the alleged event, and was only hearsay gathered at a London tavern, the Obama administration gave it to the FBI which, in turn, thought it was weighty enough to justify opening a counterintelligence case against the lawfully elected Republican nominee for president.

In other words, the Democratic administration accepted dirt from a foreign friendly and used it to justify investigating its GOP rival.

And then, OMG, they did it again just a few weeks later.

In October 2016, less than three weeks from Election Day, the Obama Justice Department approved a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to spy on the Trump campaign through its former adviser, Carter Page. The primary evidence supporting the warrant? A dossier written by a foreign friendly named Christopher Steele, a retired MI6 intelligence agent from Great Britain. Of course, the Justice Department and the FBI forgot to tell the courts that Steele actually was working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, but that’s a small detail for the purpose of this column.

For the second time in three months, the Obama administration took dirt on Trump from a foreign ally — this time, from one in Europe — and weaponized it for a criminal investigation.

Gee—that sounds eerily familiar, right? Will Obama now be dragged through the mud for committing treason, as Solomon notes in the headline of this piece? If there were an example of selective outrage or liberal media bias, well, this is it. History didn’t begin during the 2016 election; some reporters need to learn this. The Clinton Foundation connection also is a tad interesting. That organization was known for being a bank for the depositing of favors by the wealthy, well connected, and powerful. Give a large sum and then something down the road would benefit that donor politically, economically, or both. "
 
House democrats aren't the only bureaucrats politically posturing themselves by wasting tax dollars on investigations going nowhere. All of these venues are blue states, and all are also trying to gerrymander the electoral college. Creating a perception is easy, proving a conspiracy isn't. It's even harder without confirmation that a law has been violated. The Senate isn't changing hands, Americans rejected the democratic bid in 2018.

If you are not stupid, you are delusional.
 
Not as ironic as you think. The OP does say that D's are "taunting" Trump with "threats" ... That pretty well illustrates the mantra isn't sincere. My speculations, admittedly they are, demonstrate that very predictable preliminary measures haven't been undertaken by agencies directly responsible for regulatory oversight. Prosecutors cases are much easier to make when FEC or depts of taxation establish monetary civil liabilities. The prosecutor only has to prove the discrepency was intentional. It hasn't happened.
You do realize that trump has stacked every agency you reference with unconfirmed appointees?
 
Honestly I'm concentrating on not being drawn down to their level, and reducing an objective discussion to a name calling competition. The OP's title immediately establishes that democrats are simply "taunting Trump with threats". I said in my 1st reply that the DNC has plagiarized Trump's 2019 "lock her up" mantra and I think the lack of case development speaks for itself. All the potential for financial crimes laid in the documents Maxine Waters received from Deutsche bank almost 2 months ago, and I'd wager Mueller examined all of those records 2 years ago himself.
Beyond Mueller's scope. In case you haven't been paying attention, trump is trying to block every attempt to acquire the documents you reference.

https://www.businessinsider.com/maxine-waters-deutsche-bank-subpoena-trump-kushner-2019-5
 
House democrats aren't the only bureaucrats politically posturing themselves by wasting tax dollars on investigations going nowhere. All of these venues are blue states, and all are also trying to gerrymander the electoral college. Creating a perception is easy, proving a conspiracy isn't. It's even harder without confirmation that a law has been violated. The Senate isn't changing hands, Americans rejected the democratic bid in 2018.
Really? You didn't realize that Senate Dems had quite a few more seats up for election than Reps in '18?

That changes in '20.
 
You do realize that trump has stacked every agency you reference with unconfirmed appointees?

I'm aware that Trump "stacked" the SCOTUS with 2 appointees who've sided with the liberal minority on numerous occasions. I'm also aware that Henry Kerner, who Trump appointed as director of the Office of Special Counsel just alleged Kellyanne Conway violated the hatch act. Democratic FEC chairwoman Ellen Weintraub, formerly employed by Perkins Coie << how ironic is that!? >> "Blasted Trump's remarks on accepting foreign dirt". Since becoming FEC chairwoman in 2017, Ms Weintraub has initiated more than a dozen investigations targeting president Trump's 2016 campaign. Do you have any other strawmen I can dismantle for you?
 
I'm aware that Trump "stacked" the SCOTUS with 2 appointees who've sided with the liberal minority on numerous occasions. I'm also aware that Henry Kerner, who Trump appointed as director of the Office of Special Counsel just alleged Kellyanne Conway violated the hatch act. Democratic FEC chairwoman Ellen Weintraub, formerly employed by Perkins Coie << how ironic is that!? >> "Blasted Trump's remarks on accepting foreign dirt". Since becoming FEC chairwoman in 2017, Ms Weintraub has initiated more than a dozen investigations targeting president Trump's 2016 campaign. Do you have any other strawmen I can dismantle for you?
LMAO. Nice try. Some of his lackeys paying lip service, to no avail, is what you call 'dismantling'?

Give us a list of all S.C decisions since McConnell rammed through trump's appointees.
 
LMAO. Nice try. Some of his lackeys paying lip service, to no avail, is what you call 'dismantling'?
Give us a list of all S.C decisions since McConnell rammed through trump's appointees.
So you'd like to use my SCOTUS examples as your strawman? I think not. The SCOTUS isn't involved in Weintraub's personal crusade to destroy Donald Trump. Weintraub's law firm, Perkins Coie, was the means by which Clinton, the DNC, and Obama laundered payments to Fusion GPS. Now Weintraub not only has the audicity to claim foreign oppo research is illegal, but has launched a brand new investigation into the Trump tower meeting, to compliment the dozen already underway. Given Weintraub's "familiarity" with violating FEC regs on foreign contributions, and exactly how a campaign might conceal them, it's highly unlikely Weintraub's overlooked anything. These "investigations" are a means of harassment, and Dem bureacrats are posturing, pandering and fundraising by promoting conspiracy theories.
 
Strawman? So you lied about the Conservative SC siding with Liberal justices? I thought so.
Certainly I did not lie, but I won't be led down a rabbit hole. Now if you'd like me to return the favor of calling you a liar ... deny that Gorsuch and Kavanaugh haven't sided with the liberal minority on multiple occasions and I will grant your wish. I'd obviously prefer to delve into the FEC investigations that you claim were being manipulated somehow by Trump's appointee. Clearly the FEC is "stacked" ... against Donald Trump, which directly contradicts what you stated earlier. I'll leave the choice to you. Double down on the "stacked" FEC assertion, or dodge a few citations on SCOTUS decisions ... I can accommodate you either way.
 
Certainly I did not lie, but I won't be led down a rabbit hole. Now if you'd like me to return the favor of calling you a liar ... deny that Gorsuch and Kavanaugh haven't sided with the liberal minority on multiple occasions and I will grant your wish. I'd obviously prefer to delve into the FEC investigations that you claim were being manipulated somehow by Trump's appointee. Clearly the FEC is "stacked" ... against Donald Trump, which directly contradicts what you stated earlier. I'll leave the choice to you. Double down on the "stacked" FEC assertion, or dodge a few citations on SCOTUS decisions ... I can accommodate you either way.
Every govt. agency is run by unconfirmed 'acting' heads. The FEC is impotent to take any action against trump. You cherry pick one agency that paid lip service to the campaign, while being as impotent as trump is in the long run.
https://www.salon.com/2019/06/17/fe...aign-shows-dysfunction-on-both-sides_partner/

The FEC’s lack of action is not surprising — and it is unlikely that the agency will punish the Trump campaign in a meaningful way in this case. Why? Because its commissioners are split along party lines, and it is doubtful that the GOP appointees will ever vote to seriously sanction Trump or take any meaningful action to regulate the campaign finance system.

In a 2016 interview with WhoWhatWhy, then-commissioner Ann Ravel, who was a Democratic appointee, blasted her own agency and its dysfunction. Not much has changed since then.
And we can expect the campaign to once again concentrate on shoveling contributions into Trump’s pockets.
A new report shows that the campaign is paying nearly $40,000 per month for space in Trump Tower — even though a new office in Virginia has lots of unused space and its rent is much lower.
An analysis of campaign finance records shows that the president’s campaign has spent $1.3 million at Trump’s own businesses through 2018. So even if the FEC were to levy a small fine, it would still be a pittance compared to what Trump is raking in.


You aren't even trying, newb.

I'm leaving for the weekend. Not going to be online. Spend the time brushing up on your facts. I'm sure Rune can help you in my absence.
 
Whichever ... I am clearly your better. I won't be drawn down to your level, so save youself the embarrassment of trying to bait me.

You've got to watch out for Rune; because he's let everyone know, that he's a...

FUCKING VIKING, DAMNIT.

095ea45e2311cd42867eb1923bf858c3.gif
 
Back
Top