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.

06-18-2017 , 01:27 PM
damn, wallace got him so tilted. pretty shocked fox hasn't purged him yet.
06-18-2017 , 01:31 PM
Representing Trump looks like fun. No contradictions at all. It's like trying to defend the Bible in court.
06-18-2017 , 01:33 PM
Searching "chris wallace" on twitter is... interesting? Not sure if that's the right word. But boy, Trumpkins do NOT like it when their sweet propaganda nectar is tainted.
06-18-2017 , 01:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV Life
How the hell is FOX asking hard hitting questions like that? Doesn't Wallace know he's supposed to kowtow to Daddy?
If there's anything a Fox viewer hates more than liberals it's smart mouthed lawyers.
06-18-2017 , 01:40 PM
looool, dude was like, "Wait what, this was supposed to be my safespace." The flopsweat on the guy as Wallace was asking basic questions. Incredible. I think he was expecting, "Libs are snowflakes. Witchhunt, amirite?"
06-18-2017 , 01:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoltinJake
Searching "chris wallace" on twitter is... interesting? Not sure if that's the right word. But boy, Trumpkins do NOT like it when their sweet propaganda nectar is tainted.
LOL yea they mad.







Just a pimp!
06-18-2017 , 01:50 PM
So his lawyer's talking point is that "Mueller didn't notify Trump that he's being investigated, so as far as we know, he's not." Which makes sense.

But then he said @ 2:32 and 2:41 that he is being investigated. I think he didn't realize that he said Trump is being investigated and that's why he got testy when Wallace kept saying that he said it. Or maybe he did realize he said it and got tilted because it was a dumb mistake. Or he knows that Trump is in fact being investigated and inadvertently told the truth?
06-18-2017 , 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethethe
We felt the cost of massive regulation cuts here in the UK a few days ago.

It's really a demonstration of how much harm can be done even without regulation changes. It's looking like the flammable cladding of that building was not code compliant. If you gut enforcement it doesn't matter what the regulations are.
06-18-2017 , 02:25 PM
There's a Trumpian tactic that seems pretty effective - say something disputable or controversial and follow it up with "you know that" or "everybody knows that". He's daring you to challenge it, and if you don't immediately push back, it could be seen as endorsing the point.

Sekulow did it in the clip above: "John Dowd is a legal legend, you know that." I have no idea who the **** John Dowd is, but I guess even Chris Wallace doesn't dispute that Trump is hiring the best people!

Trump did it with Lester Holt: "The FBI has been in turmoil. You know that, I know that, everybody knows that."

I feel like I could find numerous examples of Conway doing this if I tried, and probably Spicer as well.

Maybe they've been doing this forever, but I feel like this is a new and slightly unnerving aspect of the gaslight administration.
06-18-2017 , 02:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese
looool, dude was like, "Wait what, this was supposed to be my safespace." The flopsweat on the guy as Wallace was asking basic questions. Incredible. I think he was expecting, "Libs are snowflakes. Witchhunt, amirite?"
06-18-2017 , 02:30 PM
I didn't know who Dowd was either. He kept McCain out of jail so I guess they're thinking he can do the same for Drumpf.
06-18-2017 , 02:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV Life
Thoughts on Rush Limbaugh calling 12 year old Chelsea Clinton a dog?

Or do you just cherry pick the stuff you want to get mad at?

But go on, tell us more about being classy.
Two wrongs dont't make a right.
06-18-2017 , 02:42 PM
Think about the kind of person willing to work for Trump at this point.

He is not only a complete ****ing imbecile, he has demonstrated time and time again that he will throw anyone under the bus. Look at the trail of formerly respected people who have whored themselves out to Trump and ruined their reputations in the process. The only people still willing to work for this guy have to be the bottom of the barrel. Hence dip****s like his personal lawyer (who should lose his law license for telling WH staffers not to lawyer up).
06-18-2017 , 02:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
Think about the kind of person willing to work for Trump at this point.

He is not only a complete ****ing imbecile, he has demonstrated time and time again that he will throw anyone under the bus. Look at the trail of formerly respected people who have whored themselves out to Trump and ruined their reputations in the process. The only people still willing to work for this guy have to be the bottom of the barrel. Hence dip****s like his personal lawyer (who should lose his law license for telling WH staffers not to lawyer up).
From day one, I thought this would be a major problem for Trump. Ideally, I want my boss to be smarter than me. I can respect him or her that way. Smart people are not going to want to work for Trump. Especially when you consider that beyond just stupid, he's a jackass as well. He throws a monkey wrench into standard logic and expects you to be able to follow along. Not many can do that.
06-18-2017 , 03:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippa58
From day one, I thought this would be a major problem for Trump. Ideally, I want my boss to be smarter than me. I can respect him or her that way. Smart people are not going to want to work for Trump. Especially when you consider that beyond just stupid, he's a jackass as well. He throws a monkey wrench into standard logic and expects you to be able to follow along. Not many can do that.
Some of America’s top law firms don’t want Donald Trump as a client
http://www.salon.com/2017/06/06/some...p-as-a-client/
Quote:
One of the most common reasons cited was the belief that Trump would not accept his lawyers’ advice and could send out tweets or other public utterances that would undercut his legal teams’ efforts.

While the article didn’t mention this as an example, the concern does draw to mind observations like that of George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley, who has noted that Trump’s tweets might hurt his lawyers’ case when arguing in support of his so-called travel ban.

“The worst aspect of the tweet is that it plays directly into the hands of those challenging his order,” Turley noted about Trump’s Monday morning tweetstorm, adding that “it must be incredibly frustrating for his counsel who have insisted that his references to a ‘Muslim ban’ during the campaign are immaterial to the executive order. It does not alter the core of the legal arguments, which I have long stated favor Trump. However, his reference to a ban (which the order is not) undermines the thrust of the arguments raised in courts across the country.”

Lawyers are also concerned that Trump may not listen to their advice or pay them for their time, Yahoo reported. There are also concerns that representing Trump may pose conflicts with some of the firms’ other clients, or that representing Trump will take up more time than they realistically have. Finally, as one lawyer with knowledge of some of the discussions said, there were concerns that being associated with Trump could hurt their reputations: “Do I want to be associated with this president and his policies?”
06-18-2017 , 03:10 PM
Also: he doesn't pay his bills.
06-18-2017 , 03:14 PM
Thing is Trump has something far more powerful than lawyers. He has the Presidency and both Houses of Congress backing him up. They aren't ever gonna impeach him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wYYX0mZsQA

Grover Norquist - "We just need a President to sign this stuff."
06-18-2017 , 03:54 PM
06-18-2017 , 03:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry
It is the massive regulations that you want that help the corporations. Corporations have no power over you, only govt has power over you. We want corporations and businesses to compete without govt picking winners and losers.

Get government out of the economy, and all a corporation can do to make money is offer you a product that you voluntarily give them money for to increase the quality of your life. When corporations get subsidies and banks get bailouts which we ALL hate......that is fascism....THAT is a result of regulation.
Hi Rand!
06-18-2017 , 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by davmcg
If there's anything a Fox viewer hates more than liberals it's smart mouthed lawyers.
The list of things liked and hated by Fox viewers are oddly in snych with the list of things liked and hated by Trump.

If anyone (Trumpkin or non-Trumpkin) doubts what I'm saying, consider Trump's enemy list and compare it to your own. If it's the same, congratulations...you win the all time brainwashing prize!
06-18-2017 , 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Two wrongs dont't make a right.
Can we quote you on this later if needed?
06-18-2017 , 04:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
Thing is Trump has something far more powerful than lawyers. He has the Presidency and both Houses of Congress backing him up. They aren't ever gonna impeach him.
Good. They get to go to jail before him too. Let's see who wants to give Mueller cause to go after them first...

Keep this in mind: The harder Trump gets squeezed, the more he pushes the responsibility onto the people around him.

It should be a fun year going forward.
06-18-2017 , 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
Two wrongs dont't make a right.
Since you obviously have strong morals, thoughts on the POTUS being in violation of the emoluments clause?
06-18-2017 , 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalfrezi
Broken pony and all that, but I just read this this morning and found it quite affecting. Thanks for posting so candidly and I hope things work out OK in the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
I'm truly sorry that this has happened to you.

That is what I fully expect to happen if I ever get into an in-depth political discussion with my mother nowadays. In the past (prior to Trump inauguration), it would be that I pin her on something clearly wrong, prove it to be wrong, and her responding that it doesn't change her mind despite how utterly wrong she is.

Now I honestly don't know what to expect if I breach that topic ever again. Probably best just to bury that topic in the ground until she dies. My sisters have done that.
Update: I just apologized to her for yelling and she apologized to me for the same. Great, right?

Now for the dark cloud to this silver lining...

Nothing was resolved. ZERO. Now there are just a bunch of off limit topics, negatively affecting the both of us, that we have to tiptoe around to avoid all sorts of conflict, and that list of topics is steadily growing.
06-18-2017 , 04:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Our House
Can we quote you on this later if needed?
Can we quote things said about Sasha and Malia Obama that show...


      
m