So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
Special counsel investigation ends
11,123 Views |
63 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by statefan91
Not much more than we know, but there are so many other investigations going it will be a year or 2 before we know.2020 is the key to get rid of this tool..RunsWithWolves26 said:
So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
Glasswolf said:Not much more than we know, but there are so many other investigations going it will be a year or 2 before we know.2020 is the key to get rid of this tool..RunsWithWolves26 said:
So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
And replace him with who?? I didn't vote for him butit unless something changes, I will in 2020 because I want nothing to do with the dem candidates right now.
Long way to go before 2020. Primaries are a year away. I've always believed if you don't vote, don't complain. I vote every time it comes time. Clinton couldn't have been nearly as bad as this tool. Was she the best? No but she would have been better than Trump.RunsWithWolves26 said:Glasswolf said:Not much more than we know, but there are so many other investigations going it will be a year or 2 before we know.2020 is the key to get rid of this tool..RunsWithWolves26 said:
So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
And replace him with who?? I didn't vote for him butit unless something changes, I will in 2020 because I want nothing to do with the dem candidates right now. The democratic nominee isn't even in the race officially. The VP candidate is but not the dem President nominee
Glasswolf said:Long way to go before 2020. Primaries are a year away. I've always believed if you don't vote, don't complain. I vote every time it comes time. Clinton couldn't have been nearly as bad as this tool. Was she the best? No but she would have been better than Trump.RunsWithWolves26 said:Glasswolf said:Not much more than we know, but there are so many other investigations going it will be a year or 2 before we know.2020 is the key to get rid of this tool..RunsWithWolves26 said:
So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
And replace him with who?? I didn't vote for him butit unless something changes, I will in 2020 because I want nothing to do with the dem candidates right now. The democratic nominee isn't even in the race officially. The VP candidate is but not the dem President nominee
Agree to disagree. There isn't a single Democrat running I will vote for at this point. Give me a Joe Lieberman type and that will get my vote. Give me a far, far left type who is screaming socialism, etc and that won't. Even if it means I gotta vote for that moron Trump.
Report says Trump did not work with Russia to influence the election. Says there was no collusion to help with getting him elected in 2016. Not sure what the Dems do now but if they actually shut the hell up and govern, they may actually have a chance in 2020.
The strategy now will be a push to release the entire report, then find a new lead to go after if there is any dirty laundry in the report. That is why they are pushing for "full transparency."RunsWithWolves26 said:
Report says Trump did not work with Russia to influence the election. Says there was no collusion to help with getting him elected in 2016. Not sure what the Dems do now but if they actually shut the hell up and govern, they may actually have a chance in 2020.
metcalfmafia said:The strategy now will be a push to release the entire report, then find a new lead to go after if there is any dirty laundry in the report. That is why they are pushing for "full transparency."RunsWithWolves26 said:
Report says Trump did not work with Russia to influence the election. Says there was no collusion to help with getting him elected in 2016. Not sure what the Dems do now but if they actually shut the hell up and govern, they may actually have a chance in 2020.
Yep. Would be nice if both sides would actually try to accomplish important stuff but that **** ain't gonna happen anymore in this political environment.
Full transparency shouldn't be something considered outlandish. The summary of the Mueller report was delivered by AG Barr, who had already shown prior to being confirmed that he didn't think the Special Counsel was even valid. Again, Barr put forward a summary of his interpretation of the report, but to think someone who was selected by the person under investigation should be taken 100% at their word is kind of silly.metcalfmafia said:The strategy now will be a push to release the entire report, then find a new lead to go after if there is any dirty laundry in the report. That is why they are pushing for "full transparency."RunsWithWolves26 said:
Report says Trump did not work with Russia to influence the election. Says there was no collusion to help with getting him elected in 2016. Not sure what the Dems do now but if they actually shut the hell up and govern, they may actually have a chance in 2020.
How about this question - Would you have taken a summary of the NCAA's investigation into UNC, delivered by Carol Folt, as the best filter of what the report says?
We get your point, but the Trump administration is deeply hurt by your comparison to uncch leadership. Despite your formal apology, the IRS will make a visit and they will restrict their search of your returns to just the years uncch was thought to be clean.statefan91 said:Full transparency shouldn't be something considered outlandish. The summary of the Mueller report was delivered by AG Barr, who had already shown prior to being confirmed that he didn't think the Special Counsel was even valid. Again, Barr put forward a summary of his interpretation of the report, but to think someone who was selected by the person under investigation should be taken 100% at their word is kind of silly.metcalfmafia said:The strategy now will be a push to release the entire report, then find a new lead to go after if there is any dirty laundry in the report. That is why they are pushing for "full transparency."RunsWithWolves26 said:
Report says Trump did not work with Russia to influence the election. Says there was no collusion to help with getting him elected in 2016. Not sure what the Dems do now but if they actually shut the hell up and govern, they may actually have a chance in 2020.
How about this question - Would you have taken a summary of the NCAA's investigation into UNC, delivered by Carol Folt, as the best filter of what the report says?
What? Two years is not enough. I thought this witch hunt was supposed to go on for 10 years. Maybe infinity. Seriously, though...our government spent more time "investigating" this fantasy than they did investigating a real catastrophe like 9/11.
The "muh Trump colluded with Russia" kookspiracy was a 100% COMPLETE LIE from the very beginning. There was never even one scintilla of evidence to link Trump doing anything improper with Russia. It was a complete fabrication cooked up by the Democrats, Leftist lamestream media, and Establishment "Deep State" immediately after the election to try to stifle Trump's presidency and cast doubt about the legitimacy of the election.
In addition, it was to cover up the REAL collusion with Russia that was perpetrated by Obama and Hillary.
What if Trump had taken millions of dollars in bribes into his foundation, and then approved the sale of 20% of U.S. Uranium production to Russia, to aid them making nuclear weapons? Well...that's exactly what Hillary Clinton and Obama did!!
here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
The whole thing was a big charade. And Trump could have shut it down from the very beginning. He is the head of the executive branch of government, and the head of the Justice Department. Trump is supposed to determine, via his control of the Justice Department, what to investigate and prosecute. He is primarily to blame for allowing the circus to go on for two whole years. It's all theatre. Trump is not delivering on his campaign promises. He is looking like another puppet, and controlled opposition. This is all a big distraction. What we should be demanding is that Trump actually TAKE ACTION and DELIVER on his campaign promises. They need to seriously crack down on illegal immigration, fund the wall, stop the illegal wars in the Mid East, etc. Instead, for two years we've been diverted and distracted into obsessing on this big fat nothing burger.
Trump should order the Justice Department to prosecute Hillary and Obama for all of their REAL crimes -- including Obama illegally spying on the Trump campaign during the election. He should order the U.S. Military to the border and have them build the wall...instead of sending them to die in the Mid East and defend the borders of Iraq/Syria/Afghanistan. But he won't. Because Trump is a puppet. He's an actor playing a role, pretending to be the President. In reality, he takes orders from his masters operating behind the scenes...just like every other President for the last 50 years or so. He pretends and talks as if he opposes the communist/globalist agenda, but is in reality doing little to nothing of substance (ie, policy and action) to hinder or oppose it.
The "muh Trump colluded with Russia" kookspiracy was a 100% COMPLETE LIE from the very beginning. There was never even one scintilla of evidence to link Trump doing anything improper with Russia. It was a complete fabrication cooked up by the Democrats, Leftist lamestream media, and Establishment "Deep State" immediately after the election to try to stifle Trump's presidency and cast doubt about the legitimacy of the election.
In addition, it was to cover up the REAL collusion with Russia that was perpetrated by Obama and Hillary.
What if Trump had taken millions of dollars in bribes into his foundation, and then approved the sale of 20% of U.S. Uranium production to Russia, to aid them making nuclear weapons? Well...that's exactly what Hillary Clinton and Obama did!!
here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
Quote:
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
[...]
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One's chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
[...]
But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation's donors.
The whole thing was a big charade. And Trump could have shut it down from the very beginning. He is the head of the executive branch of government, and the head of the Justice Department. Trump is supposed to determine, via his control of the Justice Department, what to investigate and prosecute. He is primarily to blame for allowing the circus to go on for two whole years. It's all theatre. Trump is not delivering on his campaign promises. He is looking like another puppet, and controlled opposition. This is all a big distraction. What we should be demanding is that Trump actually TAKE ACTION and DELIVER on his campaign promises. They need to seriously crack down on illegal immigration, fund the wall, stop the illegal wars in the Mid East, etc. Instead, for two years we've been diverted and distracted into obsessing on this big fat nothing burger.
Trump should order the Justice Department to prosecute Hillary and Obama for all of their REAL crimes -- including Obama illegally spying on the Trump campaign during the election. He should order the U.S. Military to the border and have them build the wall...instead of sending them to die in the Mid East and defend the borders of Iraq/Syria/Afghanistan. But he won't. Because Trump is a puppet. He's an actor playing a role, pretending to be the President. In reality, he takes orders from his masters operating behind the scenes...just like every other President for the last 50 years or so. He pretends and talks as if he opposes the communist/globalist agenda, but is in reality doing little to nothing of substance (ie, policy and action) to hinder or oppose it.
So is the NY Times fake news or real news? It's hard to tell with the way all "truthers" pick and choose articles.GuerrillaPack said:
What? Two years is not enough. I thought this witch hunt was supposed to go on for 10 years. Maybe infinity. Seriously, though...our government spent more time "investigating" this fantasy than they did investigating a real catastrophe like 9/11.
The "muh Trump colluded with Russia" kookspiracy was a 100% COMPLETE LIE from the very beginning. There was never even one scintilla of evidence to link Trump doing anything improper with Russia. It was a complete fabrication cooked up by the Democrats, Leftist lamestream media, and Establishment "Deep State" immediately after the election to try to stifle Trump's presidency and cast doubt about the legitimacy of the election.
In addition, it was to cover up the REAL collusion with Russia that was perpetrated by Obama and Hillary.
What if Trump had taken millions of dollars in bribes into his foundation, and then approved the sale of 20% of U.S. Uranium production to Russia, to aid them making nuclear weapons? Well...that's exactly what Hillary Clinton and Obama did!!
here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.htmlQuote:
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
[...]
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One's chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
[...]
But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation's donors.
The whole thing was a big charade. And Trump could have shut it down from the very beginning. He is the head of the executive branch of government, and the head of the Justice Department. Trump is supposed to determine, via his control of the Justice Department, what to investigate and prosecute. He is primarily to blame for allowing the circus to go on for two whole years. It's all theatre. Trump is not delivering on his campaign promises. He is looking like another puppet, and controlled opposition. This is all a big distraction. What we should be demanding is that Trump actually TAKE ACTION and DELIVER on his campaign promises. They need to seriously crack down on illegal immigration, fund the wall, stop the illegal wars in the Mid East, etc. Instead, for two years we've been diverted and distracted into obsessing on this big fat nothing burger.
Trump should order the Justice Department to prosecute Hillary and Obama for all of their REAL crimes -- including Obama illegally spying on the Trump campaign during the election. He should order the U.S. Military to the border and have them build the wall...instead of sending them to die in the Mid East and defend the borders of Iraq/Syria/Afghanistan. But he won't. Because Trump is a puppet. He's an actor playing a role, pretending to be the President. In reality, he takes orders from his masters operating behind the scenes...just like every other President for the last 50 years or so. He pretends and talks as if he opposes the communist/globalist agenda, but is in reality doing little to nothing of substance (ie, policy and action) to hinder or oppose it.
Y'all means ALL.
I'm all about full transparency. I was just saying what will happen next since he asked.statefan91 said:Full transparency shouldn't be something considered outlandish. The summary of the Mueller report was delivered by AG Barr, who had already shown prior to being confirmed that he didn't think the Special Counsel was even valid. Again, Barr put forward a summary of his interpretation of the report, but to think someone who was selected by the person under investigation should be taken 100% at their word is kind of silly.metcalfmafia said:The strategy now will be a push to release the entire report, then find a new lead to go after if there is any dirty laundry in the report. That is why they are pushing for "full transparency."RunsWithWolves26 said:
Report says Trump did not work with Russia to influence the election. Says there was no collusion to help with getting him elected in 2016. Not sure what the Dems do now but if they actually shut the hell up and govern, they may actually have a chance in 2020.
How about this question - Would you have taken a summary of the NCAA's investigation into UNC, delivered by Carol Folt, as the best filter of what the report says?
Got it - on the same page. Unless confidential information that affects National Security, anything our politicians do should absolutely be public knowledge.
statefan91 said:
Got it - on the same page. Unless confidential information that affects National Security, anything our politicians do should absolutely be public knowledge.
Agreed 1000%. Problem is, I've heard Dems calling for seeing everything and in some cases wanting Barr to break the law for them to see it. I can't go along with that. Agree with you that unless it is
for national security or against the law to release something, it should be released
Where did you see that? I'd like to read up on it. Assume they're just saying they want the full report without retractions.
statefan91 said:
Where did you see that? I'd like to read up on it. Assume they're just saying they want the full report without retractions.
Have heard a couple Dems mention it in interviews that they wanted this or that info released by Barr but when looking into it further, it appears it would be against the law to release some of the info they have mentioned wanting. Will try to dig a little for you and find the exact things that were mentioned.
RunsWithWolves26 said:statefan91 said:
Where did you see that? I'd like to read up on it. Assume they're just saying they want the full report without retractions.
Have heard a couple Dems mention it in interviews that they wanted this or that info released by Barr but when looking into it further, it appears it would be against the law to release some of the info they have mentioned wanting. Will try to dig a little for you and find the exact things that were mentioned.
Got it - yeah I assume the basics is just that they want to see the report, not a summary by someone selected for his position by the President.
Glad its over, I know...i know...this thing is gonna be talked about till 2020.
ncsupack1 said:
Glad its over, I know...i know...this thing is gonna be talked about till 2020.
I always subscribed to the theory that the Trump campaign was too incompetent to collude.
RunsWithWolves26 said:Glasswolf said:Long way to go before 2020. Primaries are a year away. I've always believed if you don't vote, don't complain. I vote every time it comes time. Clinton couldn't have been nearly as bad as this tool. Was she the best? No but she would have been better than Trump.RunsWithWolves26 said:Glasswolf said:Not much more than we know, but there are so many other investigations going it will be a year or 2 before we know.2020 is the key to get rid of this tool..RunsWithWolves26 said:
So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
And replace him with who?? I didn't vote for him butit unless something changes, I will in 2020 because I want nothing to do with the dem candidates right now. The democratic nominee isn't even in the race officially. The VP candidate is but not the dem President nominee
Agree to disagree. There isn't a single Democrat running I will vote for at this point. Give me a Joe Lieberman type and that will get my vote. Give me a far, far left type who is screaming socialism, etc and that won't. Even if it means I gotta vote for that moron Trump.
I can't pull the lever for Trump. After 2 years straight of Whitehouse embarrassments I just can't do it.
That said, I can't vote for Warren or Sanders either. For the other Democrats I need to learn more about them and see what else Trump Fs up between now and the election. But right now I'll probably have to go with the Libertarians again
I like Joe Biden. His age scares me a little. Like I said, long way to goIseWolf22 said:RunsWithWolves26 said:Glasswolf said:Long way to go before 2020. Primaries are a year away. I've always believed if you don't vote, don't complain. I vote every time it comes time. Clinton couldn't have been nearly as bad as this tool. Was she the best? No but she would have been better than Trump.RunsWithWolves26 said:Glasswolf said:Not much more than we know, but there are so many other investigations going it will be a year or 2 before we know.2020 is the key to get rid of this tool..RunsWithWolves26 said:
So what is it going to say? Is Trump doomed? Are the Dems going to stop with the crazy talk if he is innocent? Are the Republicans going to attack him if he is guilty? What is going to happen in the Southern district of NY? All questions that are going to be interesting. What I will find most interesting is how the far far right on Fox News and the far, far left on MSNBC, CNN, etc spin it in their favor.
And replace him with who?? I didn't vote for him butit unless something changes, I will in 2020 because I want nothing to do with the dem candidates right now. The democratic nominee isn't even in the race officially. The VP candidate is but not the dem President nominee
Agree to disagree. There isn't a single Democrat running I will vote for at this point. Give me a Joe Lieberman type and that will get my vote. Give me a far, far left type who is screaming socialism, etc and that won't. Even if it means I gotta vote for that moron Trump.
I can't pull the lever for Trump. After 2 years straight of Whitehouse embarrassments I just can't do it.
That said, I can't vote for Warren or Sanders either. For the other Democrats I need to leave more about them and see what else Trump Fs up between now and the election. But right now I'll probably have to go with the Libertarians again
You have the "problem" of choosing to ignore or attempt to discredit the information in this article, when I assume you would generally view the NY Times as a "very credible" source of information.PackBacker07 said:So is the NY Times fake news or real news? It's hard to tell with the way all "truthers" pick and choose articles.GuerrillaPack said:
What if Trump had taken millions of dollars in bribes into his foundation, and then approved the sale of 20% of U.S. Uranium production to Russia, to aid them making nuclear weapons? Well...that's exactly what Hillary Clinton and Obama did!!
here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.htmlQuote:
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
[...]
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One's chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
[...]
But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation's donors.
The NY Times is extremely dishonest and untrustworthy, as a general matter. But they do publish factual information every now and then. The NY Times is hyper leftist and hardcore advancing a communist/globalist agenda. This is not an organization that is dedicated to "publishing the truth and only the truth". They are pushing an agenda. They are propagandists. Probably 40% of their content is outright lies in articles posing as "news" to promote the communist/globalist agenda, and 50% is editorials and opinion pieces pushing the communist/globalist agenda. Of the remaining ~10%, some factual and truthful and information can be found. Sometimes this truthful information slips past the censors/Editors, etc.
As an analogy, consider a common criminal who is on trial or who has been sent to prison. If you sit down and interview them, they might lie to you 90% of the time when asked about the facts pertaining to their life and why they are being prosecuted for their crimes. But they still might tell the truth or even admit to some of their crimes 10% of the time. That's how the NY Times, NBC/ABC/CBS, and other far-Leftist propaganda "news" outfits operate. They are literally criminal organizations (ie, communist revolutionaries) who are dedicated to deceiving the public, as they further the communist/globalist agenda. But they still tell the truth and even admit to some of the criminal activity of their co-conspirators....every now and then.
When you step back and consider how any one of us decides what is a "trustworthy" source of information, you can't take the simplistic approach of picking a "trustworthy" source and believing 100% of what they say. Nor can you assume that what you consider to be an "untrustworthy" source is providing false information 100% of the time. Humans and man-made organizations are fallible. They have biases, and are willing to lie or twist the truth in order to promote their agenda. Only God can be trusted 100% of the time.
On the flip side, if you look at a generally trustworthy news source -- such as Alex Jones and Infowars, IMO, for instance -- they are truthful and/or correct on about 90% of their content. I disagree with Alex Jones on around 10% of his content/views, with most of those disagreements concerning the very most important subject areas.
The task of finding the truth is complicated. It involves considering information from a wide variety of sources, and then making judgments with a larger amount of information and weighing all of the evidence.
I am just glad it is over. I am so tired of hearing about it. Full disclosure I voted for Trump. I had to in order to have 2-3 Supreme Court justices that lean the way of my conservative preference. Do I like Trump? No way he is morally bankrupt. Is there a better option out there? It is so depressing to say, but I don't think so. What a sad world we live in today. Trump did save me 20% on my personal taxes and all of that went to 14 new employees and machinery for my company. That creates food, housing, and insurance for 14 families here in Charlotte.
I want an alternative to Trump but so far the likes of Bernie, Hillary, Biden, and Lord please help us, AOC, there is just not an alternative I can stomach. Maybe the GOP will drum up a real challenger but at this point it looks like 8 years of a moron is the lesser of the evils.
Paul Ryan would be a guy I could get excited about. But he just seems disinterested, can't say I blame him. Maybe he is considered ultra conservative and he knows he wouldn't have a real shot at winning.
I want an alternative to Trump but so far the likes of Bernie, Hillary, Biden, and Lord please help us, AOC, there is just not an alternative I can stomach. Maybe the GOP will drum up a real challenger but at this point it looks like 8 years of a moron is the lesser of the evils.
Paul Ryan would be a guy I could get excited about. But he just seems disinterested, can't say I blame him. Maybe he is considered ultra conservative and he knows he wouldn't have a real shot at winning.
Actions speak louder than words and I like trump's actions as president. Will vote for him again. I kinda like all the drama too. Grab her right by the
We're all Red on the inside. Some of us are just Blue in the face, and they're sick.
You know that only 1 of the 4 people you mentioned for the Democrats is actually declared as running, correct? I think if you're ok with the direction the country is going under Trump, inclusive of all the positives and negatives, then you should own being a Trump voter.WPNfamily said:
I am just glad it is over. I am so tired of hearing about it. Full disclosure I voted for Trump. I had to in order to have 2-3 Supreme Court justices that lean the way of my conservative preference. Do I like Trump? No way he is morally bankrupt. Is there a better option out there? It is so depressing to say, but I don't think so. What a sad world we live in today. Trump did save me 20% on my personal taxes and all of that went to 14 new employees and machinery for my company. That creates food, housing, and insurance for 14 families here in Charlotte.
I want an alternative to Trump but so far the likes of Bernie, Hillary, Biden, and Lord please help us, AOC, there is just not an alternative I can stomach. Maybe the GOP will drum up a real challenger but at this point it looks like 8 years of a moron is the lesser of the evils.
Paul Ryan would be a guy I could get excited about. But he just seems disinterested, can't say I blame him. Maybe he is considered ultra conservative and he knows he wouldn't have a real shot at winning.
Paul Ryan is too busy making $100s of thousands of dollars on the Board of Fox Corp and lobbying interests to look at running for anything currently. He also wanted to get away from the tax cuts he pushed through once they come crashing down and the country realizes there's no money to pay for all the debt that keeps getting racked up. That deficit is growing pretty impressively for Trump.
At this point in time I'll be voting for anyone but a progressive in 2020
How do you define a progressive?
Paul Ryan is a policy wonk and was always far more comfortable with legislating then politics. He was completely unprepared to handle the Freedom caucus and then Trump ate him alive.statefan91 said:You know that only 1 of the 4 people you mentioned for the Democrats is actually declared as running, correct? I think if you're ok with the direction the country is going under Trump, inclusive of all the positives and negatives, then you should own being a Trump voter.WPNfamily said:
I am just glad it is over. I am so tired of hearing about it. Full disclosure I voted for Trump. I had to in order to have 2-3 Supreme Court justices that lean the way of my conservative preference. Do I like Trump? No way he is morally bankrupt. Is there a better option out there? It is so depressing to say, but I don't think so. What a sad world we live in today. Trump did save me 20% on my personal taxes and all of that went to 14 new employees and machinery for my company. That creates food, housing, and insurance for 14 families here in Charlotte.
I want an alternative to Trump but so far the likes of Bernie, Hillary, Biden, and Lord please help us, AOC, there is just not an alternative I can stomach. Maybe the GOP will drum up a real challenger but at this point it looks like 8 years of a moron is the lesser of the evils.
Paul Ryan would be a guy I could get excited about. But he just seems disinterested, can't say I blame him. Maybe he is considered ultra conservative and he knows he wouldn't have a real shot at winning.
Paul Ryan is too busy making $100s of thousands of dollars on the Board of Fox Corp and lobbying interests to look at running for anything currently. He also wanted to get away from the tax cuts he pushed through once they come crashing down and the country realizes there's no money to pay for all the debt that keeps getting racked up. That deficit is growing pretty impressively for Trump.
Unfortunately Trump has completely destroyed any ounce of credibility that the Republican part had on Taxes and debt. There is absolutely zero excuse for the insane deficits under Trump given the current economic performance. On the flip side, I am terrified of Democrats trying to pay for their proposals with "Modern Monetary Theory."
There is no fiscal sanity in Washington right now. Very few representatives have any credibility when talking about our debt. But the chickens will come to roost soon. When entitlements fall off the fiscal cliff we will all be paying more taxes for less services.
Paul Ryan is a complete RINO. He is a Leftist who is masquerading as a "conservative". He is a controlled opposition puppet. His job is to prevent a conservative agenda from actually being implemented. He promotes amnesty for DACA. He talked big about repealing Obamacare when Obama was President, but for two years with Trump and control of the Senate, they would not do it. To the contrary, the health care bill pushed by Ryan kept 99.9% of Obamacare in place and only made a few insignificant modifications. Paul Ryan supports the big government, socialist, and open borders agenda.
Free everything
Is anyone running on that ticket? I guess Bernie is the closest to that.PackDaddy said:
Free everything
What kind of services / things do you think should be covered using taxes?
Keep this thread on topic. This ain't about debt, Paul Ryan, etc. It's about the special counsel report and investigation.
Paul Ryan is more classically republican than Trump. There is no one definition of what a "conservative" is. To call him a socialist is just plain laughable.GuerrillaPack said:
Paul Ryan is a complete RINO. He is a Leftist who is masquerading as a "conservative". He is a controlled opposition puppet. His job is to prevent a conservative agenda from actually being implemented. He promotes amnesty for DACA. He talked big about repealing Obamacare when Obama was President, but for two years with Trump and control of the Senate, they would not do it. To the contrary, the health care bill pushed by Ryan kept 99.9% of Obamacare in place and only made a few insignificant modifications. Paul Ryan supports the big government, socialist, and open borders agenda.
Obamacare couldn't be repealed because the various wing of Republicans could not agree on a replacements. Repeal without replacement was never, ever viable.
Aye ayeRunsWithWolves26 said:
Keep this thread on topic. This ain't about debt, Paul Ryan, etc. It's about the special counsel report and investigation.
.In that case, I hope the Mueller report is actually released to the extent that it can be. If it vindicates the President there shouldn't be any holdup by the powers that be, although it looks like Mitch McConnell is already trying to block its release for some reason...?
Featured Stories
See All
IPS INTEL: Women's Hoops Mid-Week Official Visitor
by James Henderson
IPS LIVE: Wolfpack Women's Season Recap Podcast
by IPS Staff
TRANSFER PORTAL SPOTLIGHT: Dontrez Styles
by Jake McSwain
NC State Forward Katie Peneueta Will Transfer
by IPS Staff
IPS IN 5: Where Things Stand Today
by James Henderson