Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
POG Politics Thread POG Politics Thread

06-15-2017 , 03:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyebooger
Whatever happened to that guy who gave a reporter a chokeslam?


He wrote a letter saying he was very sorry.
06-15-2017 , 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Lol democrats killing people then pushing for gun control

Despicable


Wtf.
06-15-2017 , 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwnsall
I would say something like martial law and the military taking over is the right time to get shoot violent, maybe just before.

What ever happened to Nazi puncher? Hopefully he was arrested
They made statues of him.
06-15-2017 , 06:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
Those on the right are pretty pissed about this. You should read some of the comments at Breitbart. I won't link them because I disapprove strongly.

I'm downright moderate compared to most of the Breitbart commenters.

You should all be so lucky to have such a reasonable, thoughtful, moderate Trump supporter in your midst, fellow POGgers.
Please don't talk about other posters.
06-15-2017 , 06:57 AM
Where do you see yourself?

06-15-2017 , 08:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Banana
i don't know what's more notable: that one of the Senate's foremost gun peddlars said it or that one of the thread's foremost warmongers liked it.

It's utter bull**** of course. Sometimes you not only have to punch a Nazi, you have to actually fight them to the last ****ing man.
Key phrase: "in our society"

Once they come at me with noise, they thereby accomplish Exit.
06-15-2017 , 08:42 AM
"foremost warmonger"
06-15-2017 , 08:47 AM
Ah okay. War for everyone else's society but not for yours. Got you.
06-15-2017 , 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
Lest you all gloat about having caught Senator Paul in a gotcha, let's just agree to disagree that things have reached the stage of "tyranny," yet. When they start cancelling elections and imposing martial law for no good reason, just a general loss of democracy, then we have tyranny.
So do we have to wait for exactly that moment before tyranny becomes apparent? Might there be some context clues before then? Maybe something about the President of the United States actively trying to discredit the fourth estate?
06-15-2017 , 08:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
CNN is reporting that Mueller is investigating Donald Trump for obstruction of justice.

Interesting this got leaked after it has become clear there is no evidence for this.

I hope Trump does fire Mueller. Comey and Mueller, don't let the door hit you on your way out!
what was the evidence that became clear that Trump didn't commit obstruction of justice? I must have missed that.
06-15-2017 , 08:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
The Media have been breathless with Trump's imminent political demise ever since he came down the escalator two years ago.

Trump has gone 71 years (happy birthday to him, by the way) without breaking the law; I'm sure he isn't starting now.
There are a ton of laws you know. Is your insinuation that in 71 years Trump has never broken a single law? Because that would be ****ing amazing. Like, Kim Jong Il 13 holes in one in a single round levels of amazing.

Maybe he truly is a god king.
06-15-2017 , 08:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
Those on the right are pretty pissed about this. You should read some of the comments at Breitbart. I won't link them because I disapprove strongly.

I'm downright moderate compared to most of the Breitbart commenters.

You should all be so lucky to have such a reasonable, thoughtful, moderate Trump supporter in your midst, fellow POGgers.
You just claimed that Trump has never broken a law in his life and that evidence has arisen that he didnt obstruct justice, somewhere.

I believe that you are moderate compared to others, and that is ****ing terrifying because those less moderate must actually think he is a god in man's clothing.
06-15-2017 , 09:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Banana
Ah okay. War for everyone else's society but not for yours. Got you.
I think you are conflating the inter-/intra- distinction, here.
06-15-2017 , 09:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
There are a ton of laws you know. Is your insinuation that in 71 years Trump has never broken a single law? Because that would be ****ing amazing. Like, Kim Jong Il 13 holes in one in a single round levels of amazing.

Maybe he truly is a god king.
I think he means "criminal law". It is indisputable that Trump settles lawsuits with some regularity.

Even still, nigh impossible, but if you look closely, Trump's tiny feet never actually touch the ground, so maybe.


Spoiler:
Fun fact: most civil laws have criminal counterparts (and vice versa) - but you have to convince a prosecutor to charge, and good luck after you've already gotten a nut for it.
06-15-2017 , 09:05 AM
Isn't the whole point of a "special prosecutor" that Trump cannot fire him?
06-15-2017 , 09:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Banana
Where do you see yourself?

I only wish I could troll as well as the author of that graph.

Hillary and Donald in the same small box, hah!
06-15-2017 , 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
what was the evidence that became clear that Trump didn't commit obstruction of justice? I must have missed that.
In Soviet Russia, the People don't prove that you are guilty. YOU prove that you AREN'T!
06-15-2017 , 09:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotawerewolf
Isn't the whole point of a "special prosecutor" that Trump cannot fire him?
Check the statute.
06-15-2017 , 09:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
In Soviet Russia, the People don't prove that you are guilty. YOU prove that you AREN'T!
wat? How does this make a lick of ****ing sense? You said that there was evidence that Trump didnt obstruct justice. What is the evidence?If the evidence is that no evidence has yet been revealed while the people investigating are gathering evidence... that doesnt support your point.
06-15-2017 , 09:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotawerewolf
I think he means "criminal law". It is indisputable that Trump settles lawsuits with some regularity.

Even still, nigh impossible, but if you look closely, Trump's tiny feet never actually touch the ground, so maybe.


Spoiler:
Fun fact: most civil laws have criminal counterparts (and vice versa) - but you have to convince a prosecutor to charge, and good luck after you've already gotten a nut for it.
Right but never being prosecuted for breaking a law, and never breaking a law are two ENTIRELY different things. Otherwise people could have said the same about Capone until he was prosecuted for tax evasion.
06-15-2017 , 09:15 AM
Wife just showed me a Samantha Bee clip on Republicans blocking legislation to end child marriage in the US.
06-15-2017 , 09:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
In Soviet Russia, the People don't prove that you are guilty. YOU prove that you AREN'T!
The first litigation lesson I ever learned: "story beats no story"


It is completely standard for evidence revealed during an ongoing investigation not to be disclosed to the public, for what I hope are some obvious reasons.

The absurdity of "you can't investigate me unless you have already evidence" should also be salient for anybody with intellectual scruples, setting aside the evidence already out there (the associations, the ass-kissing, and the election interference, all of which conveniently tie together without the need of aliens or international, collusive bankers).

Last edited by iamnotawerewolf; 06-15-2017 at 09:28 AM.
06-15-2017 , 09:19 AM
Btw Zork, where do I sign up to get on the talking points email list?

https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker/sta...Findex406.html
06-15-2017 , 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamnotawerewolf
Wife just showed me a Samantha Bee clip on Republicans blocking legislation to end child marriage in the US.
unpossible, what about pizzagate!

And yes, this happened last month in Joisey and is crazy

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN1872VB

"Republican Chris Christie, a supporter of President Donald Trump, said such a ban would conflict with religious customs."

Who

****ing

caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaares
06-15-2017 , 09:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
Check the statute.
You're right:

Quote:
(d) The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

28 CFR 600.7

The AG's termination authority is not absolute, though. See Nader v. Bork (holding the firing by the AG of the special prosecutor into the Nixon controversy illegal). Granted, the exact contours of the SP office have changed since then, but the general precedent, I believe, still holds - unless they aren't doing their job and correctly, you can't touch them.

      
m