Are Americans really ready to take this on?
As wisdom drops innocently from the mouths of babes, so too we get the game plan to discredit Robert Mueller and defend the Kremlin installed puppet, from the keyboards of wingnut idiots that visit here. In summary form:
“Mr Mueller was a contributor to Hillary Clinton’s campaign…”
“…he has loaded up his staff with other Clinton contributors…”
“If Mueller is fired, someone less biased will be appointed to the position…”
“…the ‘investigation’ are politically motivated”
This puerile defense of Trump’s obvious crimes has been the in works for a while in the wing nut media. It has been building since before the inauguration if you count Trump’s endless attacks in a free press and the idea of legitimate constitutional checks and balances.
The bottom line is that the racists, a-holes and dumbfucks who consider themselves “conservatives” first and Americans last, are ready to fight for their racist dumbfuck President and his vision of a racist, dumbfuck American Oligarchy. Their rationalizations are bottomless. Their illusions constantly reinforced by hitting the Fox News crack pipe.
Are ordinary Americans ready to take this on? Are we ready to fight for the free America we grew up in? Has our mettle been bread out of us by 240 years of relative domestic peace and prosperity? Are we too tired or distracted by our boutique issues, and petty rivalries to link up in the streets?
I admit that I didn’t see this coming in year one of Trump’s Kleptocracy, but now I’m convinced that these are questions that will be answered in the coming months.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/presidential-pardon-could-backfire-185405696.html
President Trump is considering pardoning family members and staffers caught up in the Russia investigation, but legal experts warn that it could backfire by making it harder for them to avoid testifying.
Under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, Americans are protected against self-incrimination, but people who have been pardoned are no longer under any legal jeopardy, Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe told TIME.
“Anyone pardoned by Trump would lose most of the 5th Amendment’s protection against compelled testimony that might otherwise have incriminated the pardoned family member or associate, making it much easier for DOJ and Congress to require such individuals to give testimony that could prove highly incriminating to Trump himself,” Tribe said in an email.
Still, that could lead to another constitutional standoff, if the recipients of the Trump pardons refused to testify before Congress.
…or when testifying simply lie their asses off.
My favorite part is where he wouldn’t vote for Nixon because Nixon was a crook. That means Dana is over 60, meaning if he hasn’t developed any sense by now he’s never going to, and that he has lost the ability over time to recognize a crook when he sees one.
The meager critical thinking faculties have been destroyed. They are like the child soldiers of Uganda.
Truly. Do you know who else must be biased because he contributed to Democrats? Donald J. Trump.
Alby wrote:
I’m 64. As for recognizing a crook, I certainly did: that’s why I could not vote for Hillary Clinton, a crook for whom I suppose most of the readers here did vote last November. I also did not vote for Donald Trump, because he’s an [insert slang term for the rectum here], but voted for Gary Johnson instead.
Now, I’ll admit it: I never expected my vote to matter. I assumed, like everyone else did, that Mrs Clinton would carry Pennsylvania — no Republican had since the elder George Bush in 1988 — and thus holding my nose and voting for Mr Trump wasn’t necessary to keep Mrs Clinton in Chappaqua. I was as surprised as anyone when she lost.
Our esteemed host referred to Mr “Trump’s obvious crimes,” but what are they? Yeah, he ran a very aggressive campaign, as he should have, because in an election, there are no points for second place. Mrs Clinton’s campaign was just as aggressive toward Mr Trump, though far more ineptly run.
Were the Russians the ones who hacked John Podesta and the DNC, and then gave the information to WikiLeaks? Could very well have been, but if those emails were damaging to the Clinton campaign, it wasn’t due to who hacked them, but what they contained, such as Donna Brazile giving her at least one debate question in advance, Jennifer Palmeiri’s denigration of Baptists and Catholics, and Mr Podesta telling someone that they needed to “sober (Mrs Clinton) up” at three in the afternoon.
Of course, the gradual release of those emails — Julian Assange clearly hates Mrs Clinton — continually brought attention to Mrs Clinton’s worst decision, to set up that private email server while Secretary of State. While the Democrats tried to defend it as not having contained classified information — right up until it was found — the public recognized, all along, that there was no reason for the Secretary to do that unless she was deliberately trying to evade open records laws. She carried the baggage of being seen as fundamentally dishonest. Whether Mr Trump was dishonest or not didn’t seem to matter, and the depressed turnout demonstrated that a lot of people simply couldn’t vote for either candidate.
My guess is that, at worst, we’ll find some technical violations of the law, based on the sheer size and scope of the Trump business empire, and its entanglements in real estate and the entertainment industry, but they won’t be anything that would remotely rise to impeachable offenses.
When 61% of registered voters, according to a Washington Post poll, believe that the Democrats stand for nothing other than opposition to President Trump, maybe you (plural) need to rethink your strategy. The ACA is failing, and if the GOP cannot manage to pass a replacement bill, one would think that smart Democrats would unify on something like a single-payer proposal to put in opposition, but if there is anything like that out there, it’s getting almost zero publicity.
In somewhat related news, The Hill reports that Senator Bernie Sanders, who will be 79 on election day of 2020, is “keeping the door open” for another presidential run:
Mr Biden will be a far-more-youthful 78 on election day on 2020! 🙂
If I want to know the talking points going out to the nation’s idiots I can read all of that or watch Hannity for two minutes. Equally nauseating choices.
I suppose I’ll let the resident Dumbfuck hang around for a while simple because I hate to watch Hannity even for two minutes.
Hint: Bernie’s objection to Biden is not that he’s old.
Mr 330 wrote:
And I’ll try not to monopolize comment threads! 🙂
@dana: The obvious crimes are fraud and money laundering, both of which occurred long before this dive into politics. I’m surprised your ace crook-spotting skills failed you there.
Hillary’s “crookedness” — I’m interested to see what you point to there, since she’s a sharp-enough lawyer to have stayed not only out of jail but also never been indicted — is debatable, but I don’t like or trust her either. What I can’t understand is how someone who “loathes” Hillary finds anything less loathsome about Trump. I can see hating them both, but liking one and hating the other is a triumph of rooting for the laundry.
PS: Your crook-spotting skills also seem to have failed you in the case of Ken Ham. I’m starting to think your crook-spotting skills are not as keen as you think they are.
I think it may be easier to hide the resentment of women in those details
@mouse: No, I’m really interested in their claims of her crookedness. I know she SEEMS slick and slimy (metaphorically, people) but nobody has been able to pin anything on her, and it hasn’t been for lack of trying.
I count the Clinton Foundation as crooked, because whether donors gained access or not, they certainly weren’t discouraged from thinking that donations would gain them access. I don’t care how much good they do with the money, that’s obtaining it under false pretenses.
Of course, that pales compared with the crookedness of Trump, even on that one issue (foreign governments stay at his hotel for the same reason), which is why I’m interested in the details of the charge against her.
“Are ordinary Americans ready to take this on?”
You’re not ordinary Americans. You’re weirdos that want to transgender/neuter European and African American males while colonizing the country with more diversity.
“Are we ready to fight for the free America we grew up in?”
Boomer? That’s gone. The new America is diversity, a multicultural police state, hate speech laws and emerging ethnic conflict.
“Has our mettle been bread out of us by 240 years of relative domestic peace and prosperity?”
Baby Boomer, right? Maybe if you waddle around in the streets with a pussy hat on, that will help defeat Trump… another Boomer.
Just keep focusing on this Russian kookspiracy stuff, you’re doing great.
Ooh, a he-man! Watch yer balls, matey. Just visiting the site could shrivel your testes.
The rambling litany of inchoate right-wing radio memes isn’t necessarily the best argument here. It just makes you sound like a rube. Mark me down as unimpressed.
Makes sense. I think a lot of why she lost was the endless propaganda and false stories