Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

---

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.

---

I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.

---

But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.

---

You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

---

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.

---

Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.

---

What if she is part of the Illuminati?

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

---

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.

---

I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.

---

But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.

---

You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

---

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.

---

Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.

---

What if she is part of the Illuminati?

---

I'm not even sure what that is. Was that meant for me?

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

---

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.

---

I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.

---

But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.

---

You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

---

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.

---

Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.

---

What if she is part of the Illuminati?

---

I always thought she was the evil witch on any of the Disney stories. Or the one from the West in Kansas.

hokiewolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Switching topics, for you guys that lean to the right, I have a blind congressional candidate:

1. Fights for the forgotten little guy
2. Wants to bring/protect manufacturing jobs in America
3. Wants to bring back American Greatness and is America First
4. Is not an insider but is a hell raiser. Thinks that the establishment is ignoring his districts concerns.
5. Thinks there is over reach by the FBI
6. Is upset about the status of the Southern border
7. Is concerned about election integrity and thinks an election was stolen with illegal votes.

Would you vote for this guy?

---

Need more information. Some of the most important issues not covered. Does he support the Second Amendment, or does he support the Left's gun ban agenda? For or against abortion? For or against the insane transgender agenda and drag queen shows for school children? For or against mandating the covid vaxx? For or against lockdowns during another fake pandemic? For or against massive debt and spending that is causing inflation?

---

those are the top 7 issues for him. Seem like a viable candidate?

---

Hokie, to answer your question… Yes, this person appears viable. Now, GP is correct with understanding more about the persons policies. So, yes, I like those points; however, tell us more…

---

Sure, you just elected 1984 James Anthony Traficant Jr. Congrats!

---

Zzzzzzzz

Steve Videtich said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

---

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.

---

I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.

---

But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.

---

You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

---

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.

---

Hillary didn't have the power to declassify documents.

---

What if she is part of the Illuminati?

---

I'm not even sure what that is. Was that meant for me?

---

it was a joke. BTW Hillary as Sec of State had authority to classify and de-classify docs.

hokiewolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

Switching topics, for you guys that lean to the right, I have a blind congressional candidate:

1. Fights for the forgotten little guy
2. Wants to bring/protect manufacturing jobs in America
3. Wants to bring back American Greatness and is America First
4. Is not an insider but is a hell raiser. Thinks that the establishment is ignoring his districts concerns.
5. Thinks there is over reach by the FBI
6. Is upset about the status of the Southern border
7. Is concerned about election integrity and thinks an election was stolen with illegal votes.

Would you vote for this guy?

---

Need more information. Some of the most important issues not covered. Does he support the Second Amendment, or does he support the Left's gun ban agenda? For or against abortion? For or against the insane transgender agenda and drag queen shows for school children? For or against mandating the covid vaxx? For or against lockdowns during another fake pandemic? For or against massive debt and spending that is causing inflation?

---

those are the top 7 issues for him. Seem like a viable candidate?

---

Hokie, to answer your question… Yes, this person appears viable. Now, GP is correct with understanding more about the persons policies. So, yes, I like those points; however, tell us more…

---

Sure, you just elected 1984 James Anthony Traficant Jr. Congrats!

---

He was ahead of his time…

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

I guess it goes back to my question regarding Trumps rhetoric toward Hillary. It could be viewed as a political hit. If you don't think Trump will be brought up on charges, it only leaves 2 conclusions. 1. He did nothing wrong. 2. This is all politically motivated.

---

A third obvious potential conclusion is that they investigate and end up with the exact same result they did with Hillary (and I think this is the likeliest outcome for Trump since it's the most common outcome of these cases generally).

Trump could be found to have been very careless and negligent with processes and document security, but not to the extent that warrant criminal charges.

In that case he and Hillary clearly did do many things wrong, but those things don't meet the bar for criminal charges.

---

I'm not sure what type of statute is there for record keeping process. I'm sure there should be a process, outlined by the each administration; however, I'm not sure the process has been set in law.

---

But surely any admin should be able to quickly and readily demonstrate when, where and how the POTUS declared documents non-con, right?
And the inability to do so, should reflect poorly on whomever the POTUS is.

---

You would think…

That said, as I understand it, the President can "Wave his Hand" over a stack of documents and make them declassified. So, if the staff isn't keeping up with a process, then that's on them. I've said it before, this hs nothing to do with these documents. It's EXACTLY the same thing as the Russiagate ordeal!

---

Cary if Presidents aren't responsible for the actions of their staff then Hillary's not responsible for her staffer deleting the 30,000 emails.

---

Ignorance is bliss…

This is a good read…

https://apple.news/Azzdws7FHRfilTwTcHyZYTg

LOL... been a busy week or so at work...

Glad to see the same two water toting "independents" sniffing Sleepy Joe's jock strap as usual.

And most of all, not contributing a damn thing to the conversation......

What this administration is doing is nothing short of an outright attempted complete takeover of the government. And tonight, Sleepy Joe will rail against 74 million people that voted for President Trump.

Good job "Great Unifier."

Anyone that can support this clown has their head so far up their ass they aren't worth talking to.

Glad to see the gladiator back! Fight on brother!

Werewolf said:

---

Glad to see the gladiator back! Fight on brother!

---

Had a work conference over the weekend, trade show until yesterday. Pulling 12 hour days since last Wednesday. Didn't feel like yammering with Pinocchio and his "libertarian" buddy.

Per the communist Left, arming the Taliban and arming 87,000 new IRS agents with AR-15s is good.

But they can't tolerate patriotic American citizens having AR-15s.

https://instagr.am/p/Ch94AWVMVJV

But does he hurt the little feewlings of lefty MARXISTS?

That's all that matters... oh... and making sure everyone gets a trophy!!

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/could-the-prospect-of-lower-gas-prices-be-motivating-bidens-revival-of-the-iran-deal/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=third

Quote:

---

It appears that we are days away from the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Deal, the infamous agreement on Iran's nuclear program between the Islamic Republic and the U.S., U.K., Russia, China, France, and Germany that the Trump administration withdrew from.

Restoring the accord would have grave geopolitical consequences for the wider region and be a boon for America's adversaries. But one unappreciated aspect of the pact's resurrection is how it could benefit Democrats politically.

As soon as the deal is inked, Iran can increase its oil production by as much as 900,000 barrels daily, easing supply pressures significantly and bringing down prices in global energy markets. If crude-oil prices drop, prices at the pump will come down with them.

Lower gas prices would be a much-needed reprieve for consumers, but would also benefit Democrats politically in the run-up to the midterms. And achieving that desired outcome in this manner strengthens a regime hostile to the U.S. while enabling Biden and Democrats to escape the blame for the consequences of their policies, which are hostile to U.S. energy independence and incentivize foreign energy producers over domestic fossil-fuel production.

---

What do y'all think? Would returning to the nuclear deal with Iran be worth a reduction at the pump?

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/could-the-prospect-of-lower-gas-prices-be-motivating-bidens-revival-of-the-iran-deal/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=blog-post&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=third

Quote:

---

It appears that we are days away from the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iran Deal, the infamous agreement on Iran's nuclear program between the Islamic Republic and the U.S., U.K., Russia, China, France, and Germany that the Trump administration withdrew from.

Restoring the accord would have grave geopolitical consequences for the wider region and be a boon for America's adversaries. But one unappreciated aspect of the pact's resurrection is how it could benefit Democrats politically.

As soon as the deal is inked, Iran can increase its oil production by as much as 900,000 barrels daily, easing supply pressures significantly and bringing down prices in global energy markets. If crude-oil prices drop, prices at the pump will come down with them.

Lower gas prices would be a much-needed reprieve for consumers, but would also benefit Democrats politically in the run-up to the midterms. And achieving that desired outcome in this manner strengthens a regime hostile to the U.S. while enabling Biden and Democrats to escape the blame for the consequences of their policies, which are hostile to U.S. energy independence and incentivize foreign energy producers over domestic fossil-fuel production.

---

What do y'all think? Would returning to the nuclear deal with Iran be worth a reduction at the pump?

---

Sure... following this administration's lead has worked wonders for this country.

As long as he doesn't send out any mean tweets am I right??

caryking said:

---

This is a good read…

https://apple.news/Azzdws7FHRfilTwTcHyZYTg

---

I'm not sold on Rick Scott; I think he's a RINO. A lot of theater here would be my 1st thought.

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

---

Not Hunter's wife?

Werewolf said:

---

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

---

Not Hunter's wife?

---

The account was deleted for impersonation. You can try searching for it. The foundation she chairs confirmed she has no Twitter account

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

---

Not Hunter's wife?

---

The account was deleted for impersonation. You can try searching for it. The foundation she chairs confirmed she has no Twitter account

---

10 4. I think they've got his laptop anyway.....so I hear anyway. No worries.

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

---

So does the laptop and diary concern you?

I laugh at you MARXISTS that say that the reason you hate Trump is because of his "morals.."

Really shows who has CONVICTION and who doesn't.

An odd thing to say when the president has a 38 percent approval rating. https://t.co/JQCtw90vEE

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 1, 2022

BBW12OG said:

---

I laugh at you MARXISTS that say that the reason you hate Trump is because of his "morals.."

Really shows who has CONVICTION and who doesn't.

An odd thing to say when the president has a 38 percent approval rating. https://t.co/JQCtw90vEE

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 1, 2022

---

honestly surprised you follow Charlie Cooke on Twitter, since he's an establishment Rhino who hates Trump and all

hokiewolf said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

I laugh at you MARXISTS that say that the reason you hate Trump is because of his "morals.."

Really shows who has CONVICTION and who doesn't.

An odd thing to say when the president has a 38 percent approval rating. https://t.co/JQCtw90vEE

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 1, 2022

---

honestly surprised you follow Charlie Cooke on Twitter, since he's an establishment Rhino who hates Trump and all

---

A lot of RINO rhetoric is optics. Silent for a CAUSE. Its not easy to identify who is who on the R side.

Don't you love it when trolls chime in and add NOTHING to the conversation other than to take a dig at a poster?

Damn shame people can't stick to the topic.............

BBW12OG said:

---

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

---

So does the laptop and diary concern you?

---

Im just here reading through the thread, not gonna get dragged into any debates. Just noticed the tweet screengrab since a friend sent to me yestesrday and i found it interesting and looked into it. Just wanted to let the poster know it was just a fake since its hard to know what to believe on twitter sometimes.

No problem.

All the communist Democrat party does now is foam at the mouth to ban guns. Why don't they just change the name of their party to the "Gun Ban Party"?

This un-American traitorous communist trash now says that the speed of a bullet "justifies" banning the gun.

Of course, he LIES and spouts total nonsense, claiming that "the speed of a bullet from an AR-15 travels 5 times faster than the bullet from any other gun". Lmao

What lies WON'T these communist scum tell to push their agenda?? They lie about everything. But then you have all these Leftist idiot dupes who will believe these ridiculous lies. Because they fall for all the lies -- the 70+ genders, the "climate change" hoax, the covid scamdemic, "unborn children are not human", and on and on and on.

https://instagr.am/p/Ch7NLYWjNqZ

jadawson said:

---

BBW12OG said:

---

jadawson said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

I'm predicting SADS or her suicide.

---

FYI in case you weren't aware, that's not actually hallie Biden

---

So does the laptop and diary concern you?

---

Im just here reading through the thread, not gonna get dragged into any debates. Just noticed the tweet screengrab since a friend sent to me yestesrday and i found it interesting and looked into it. Just wanted to let the poster know it was just a fake since its hard to know what to believe on twitter sometimes.

---

U cool with me. Doing my best to share non-Corporate Media news.

I will tell all the guys on my side that TRUTH NEWS internet sites have become infested with fake sites and posters. Its caught me a couple of times here..........and this won't be the last . I could start sending my stuff to SNOPES.COM to fact check :-)

https://instagr.am/p/Ch_B9WvD2qk

Quote:

---

This man is damn near declaring war on political opposition. This man has one of the lowest approval ratings in history. This man's press Secretary said, in summary, that the MAGA agenda is a threat to our democracy. This man's dangerous and divisive rhetoric is what the real threat is… this is borderline Stalin type rhetoric… very scary times

---

22 months on 9/3/2022. Looking for dicey times starting tomorrow or the next and for 3-4 months should be exciting times.