Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

05-18-2017 , 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by +rep_lol
some of you really need to do a better job of posting, rather than constantly falling back on this "WAAF" trope in spots where it totally doesn't appear to be that way

the media isn't going to ****ing forget all about michael ****ing flynn, jesus
He didn't say the media would forget Flynn, just this aspect of the investigation as it's very complicated and it's much easier to hold eyes to the screen by talking about the latest stupid **** Trump tweeted than the complex details of Flynn's case.

I think it will get some play but I agree that it won't get the play that it should, at least not right away.
05-18-2017 , 11:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
The worst job in Washington right now: Working for Trump
For many White House staffers, impromptu support groups of friends, confidants and acquaintances have materialized, calling and texting to check in, inquiring about their mental state and urging them to take care of themselves.

One Republican operative in frequent contact with White House officials described them as*“going through the stages of grief.” Another said some aides have*“moved to angry,” frustrated with a president who demands absolute loyalty but in recent days has publicly tarnished the credibility of his team by sending them out with one message — only to personally undercut it later with a contradicting tweet or public comment.
Yet none of them have the balls to resign which at this point would be a huge career boon. The longer the wait the more tarnished they become. I don't get how any partially sane person could continue working in that environment. The first one or two to voluntarily jump ship (as long as they are not rotten to the core) will benefit much more then trying to ride this water slide to hell.
05-18-2017 , 11:58 AM
Lawyer: Don't contact Flynn!
Trump: Flynn, stay strong, buddy!



https://twitter.com/Isikoff/status/865220645046681601
05-18-2017 , 11:58 AM
STAY STRONG LITTLE BUDDY


Last edited by Namath12; 05-18-2017 at 11:59 AM. Reason: MY PONY IS SO STRONG JUST THE BEST PONY
05-18-2017 , 12:03 PM
I've read about 6 articles and several CNN and MSNBC clips of wistful pondering over why on earth is Trump so intent on sticking up for Flynn? Maybe Trump is returning the loyalty Flynn showed throughout the campaign leading chants of "lock her up", etc. It makes no sense.

Yeah maybe. Or maybe it makes perfect sense and he's scared Flynn will flip, since the first thing he did was ask for immunity. This is why no one with a brain trusts MSM. They know damn well what's going on, but they tease it out to kill air time like this is one big ****ing soap opera. "Whatever is going on here? With me, is our panel of 6 guests to help sort it all out." Please... Go **** yourselves talking heads.
05-18-2017 , 12:03 PM
this wapo article is a great summation of events last night as it strings together all the beautiful leakage as we count down to the end of the orange gorilla.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.7c0399d07a25

For any president, one of these headlines would be very bad news. For President Trump, they all came in a span of 12 hours:

“Justice Department to appoint special counsel to oversee probe of Russian meddling in 2016 election”
“House majority leader told colleagues last year: ‘I think Putin pays’ Trump”
“Flynn stopped military plan Turkey opposed — after being paid as its agent”
“Trump Team Knew Flynn Was Under Investigation Before He Came to White House”
“Israeli Source Seen as Key to Countering Islamic State Threat”
“Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians — sources”

It was a dizzying Wednesday night for political reporters and followers alike, with a bevy of new information being thrown at them on multiple fronts. And it continued into early Thursday morning with that last headline, from Reuters.
05-18-2017 , 12:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Getting a blowjob was definitely legal.
It wasn't in Missouri in the 90s. Not sure about DC.
05-18-2017 , 12:07 PM
and lol this

His complaints contrasted sharply with the near universal welcome in Washington for Robert Mueller, the former FBI director picked for the special counsel post Wednesday by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

"With all of the illegal acts that took place in the Clinton campaign & Obama Administration, there was never a special councel appointed!"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 18, 2017
Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!
7:52 AM - 18 May 2017
21,451 21,451 Retweets 66,423 66,423 likes

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/18/politi...ent/index.html
05-18-2017 , 12:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyebooger
Ummmmm.....what?



https://twitter.com/AP/status/865225072918880256
So does he just get imprisoned indefinitely ?
05-18-2017 , 12:08 PM
Pretty sure the max is 1 year for contempt of congress
05-18-2017 , 12:17 PM
If he starts cooperating with Congress, then I'm sure he'll have a little polonium-laced soup in his near future.
05-18-2017 , 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
Yet none of them have the balls to resign which at this point would be a huge career boon. The longer the wait the more tarnished they become. I don't get how any partially sane person could continue working in that environment. The first one or two to voluntarily jump ship (as long as they are not rotten to the core) will benefit much more then trying to ride this water slide to hell.
Agree. Let's not feel bad for these people. They are part of the problem. None are slaves. They are choosing to support the worst president of all time. They deserve any suffering that is happening.
05-18-2017 , 12:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
No debate on this one baby. If there is a hell I hope his butthole is securely impaled by the devils pitchfork. **** that guy. Glad he is dead.
There's lots of this ITT.

If we become happy when learning someone died that to me means we prefer them dead. In other words, if we had to choose, we'd choose that they not be alive.

For those of you happy that this dude is no longer alive, would you be OK with the death penalty if you knew with 100% accuracy that the dude being killed was guilty?
05-18-2017 , 12:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
Well, this is new. A fair & balanced Fox story that accepts the existence of Comey's incriminating memo. Also they didn't bring up Hillary once, despite the overwhelming temptation.

Comey known as prolific note-taker – could more memos emerge?
I watched Fox for a few minutes last night. It was that show The 5 or whatever it's called. They were annoyed that people were talking impeachment. The one guy said something like "If the president can survive a little locker room talk, he can survive a silly memo."

So I really wouldn't count on Fox to tell the truth.
05-18-2017 , 12:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
I was reading yesterday or the day before that a Congressional subpoena doesn't actually have a lot of teeth behind it. They lack the power of the executive branch to round you up and throw you in prison for defying one.
It has teeth. For instance, he can be held in custody until he complies.

And refusing to comply is itself a misdemeanor that can be punished (separately from the 'punishment' of being in custody until he complies).
05-18-2017 , 12:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudeImBetter
There's lots of this ITT.

If we become happy when learning someone died that to me means we prefer them dead. In other words, if we had to choose, we'd choose that they not be alive.

For those of you happy that this dude is no longer alive, would you be OK with the death penalty if you knew with 100% accuracy that the dude being killed was guilty?
This is dumb. I'm happy he's dead, I did not actively wish for his death.

Last edited by Gizmo; 05-18-2017 at 12:30 PM. Reason: But this is probably just you needing some attention.
05-18-2017 , 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudeImBetter
There's lots of this ITT.

If we become happy when learning someone died that to me means we prefer them dead. In other words, if we had to choose, we'd choose that they not be alive.

For those of you happy that this dude is no longer alive, would you be OK with the death penalty if you knew with 100% accuracy that the dude being killed was guilty?
I think you pondered this on your own for a while you'd find the answer without having to ask it.
05-18-2017 , 12:34 PM
If they don't announce a cause of death, in going to snap assume it was auto-erotic asphyxia.
05-18-2017 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudeImBetter
For those of you happy that this dude is no longer alive, would you be OK with the death penalty if you knew with 100% accuracy that the dude being killed was guilty?
Non sequitur, the death penalty applies to literally everyone
05-18-2017 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wooders0n
What does that even mean lol
Wiki: Contempt of Congress

Refusing a subpoena won't fly with a Grand Jury, though.

So is the play for Trump to issue Flynn a blanket pardon to keep him from making a deal or something? If so what happens next?
05-18-2017 , 12:37 PM
If Flynn isn't going to acknowledge a subpoena, why did he ask for immunity?
05-18-2017 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudeImBetter
There's lots of this ITT.

If we become happy when learning someone died that to me means we prefer them dead. In other words, if we had to choose, we'd choose that they not be alive.

For those of you happy that this dude is no longer alive, would you be OK with the death penalty if you knew with 100% accuracy that the dude being killed was guilty?
Being happy someone is dead != wanting to give the government the power to kill people
05-18-2017 , 12:43 PM
I saw this joke on Facebook earlier.

"I was told to always speak good for the dead, so when I heard Roger Ailes had died, I said 'Good'".
05-18-2017 , 12:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudeImBetter
There's lots of this ITT.

If we become happy when learning someone died that to me means we prefer them dead. In other words, if we had to choose, we'd choose that they not be alive.

For those of you happy that this dude is no longer alive, would you be OK with the death penalty if you knew with 100% accuracy that the dude being killed was guilty?
I'd be ok with the death penalty for posts this bad
05-18-2017 , 12:44 PM
Appropriate place for all navel-gazing discussion about the proper politeness protocol upon the death of a known scumbag: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/41...-dead-1667438/

      
m