Democrats gear up to investigate Trump
 

Just what we need, another investigation into Trump (running simultaneous to the other one, I'm assuming?) with, same as the other one, no cap on how much they're allowed to spend on it.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/28/polit...ing/index.html

This is gonna be the real end of Trump! Any time now!

At this point, can't we just merge all the Donald threads into one.

Call the merged thread "Stupid Watergate" and we're golden, golden as a certain shower.

Yes, there's a lot of smoke! The tightening noose! ANY... DAY... NOW!

Trump only has one year left before the election, why not just encourage people to vote democrat in 2020?

because they don't have anyone to run against him in 2020. in fact, it looks like they've forgotten all about it.

the big bad boogey man has them so scared and angry, that they've devoted all their attention to him and become worse than him in the process.

Democrats are allowed to spend as much money as they want with these bogus investigations but as soon as Trump wants to spend money to build a wall, they're up in arms over using the money for that over healthcare, schools and other things they havent cared about up until this point.

"bogus investigations" huh .I bet you were ok with the tons of "bogus investigations" into Benghazi the republicans did about Hillary and all the money they wasted :roll:

Trump's Wall is mythical Why should we have to pay for that wall. he clearly said Mexico was gonna pay for it.

Yeah, I want him to make good on his promise that they'd foot the bill, not our citizens.

https://i.imgur.com/qrV6A3j.png




Campaigning normally didn't used to even start this soon, so I'm not sure why anyone is surprised that there is little happening yet or few people to even suggest they might run. Personally I'm tired of 2 year campaigns and I doubt I'm alone. If they hold off for a while still (maybe until summer at least?) I'm totally okay with that. (But I bet once we hit the New Year it'll start up...)

I'm not exactly seeing any competitors for third parties yet either, nor any Republicans. While I guess it's rare for anyone to run against a sitting president of their own party it honestly wouldn't surprise me if one or two chose to do so.



edit: Wow, since he's leaving, what if Mattis ran or was in as VP alongside a strong contender...? I won't even assume a side since he supposedly doesn't affiliate himself with any specific party.

Oh you mean the investigations that had actual proof from her time as SoS. Gotcha.

Trump: "Let's build a wall."
Republicans: "Yes, let's build it!"
Democrats: "We're for border security, but NOT that!"
Republicans: "Then what?"
Democrats: "I dunno! Just not that!"
Republicans: "No, really... what's your counter proposal?"
Democrats: "I DUNNO! Just no wall, please!"

Trump we are gonna build a wall and Mexico is gonna pay for that wall.


Also Trump. I need money for my wall which I said Mexico was gonna pay for but instead I am gonna shutdown the government over.

If he wants it so bad, let him pay for it.

That's an interesting question. It's probably been asked before, but I wasn't paying attention.

How much of the wall COULD Trump finance personally, if he so chose? What's the hairpiece's net worth?

He's worth about 3 billion according to Google.

So, about half, then. Bet he doesn't want it THAT badly....

I see the same thing. And he's last said that the wall could be as little as $15 billion.

I'd give him credit if he liquidated some stuff and paid for, say, $1 billion himself. Show us he actually means it.

I like the people complaining about the money being used on investigations, when you know, it's actually cost nothing, if not made a profit at this point. Mueller has been arresting Trump's cronies at a surprisingly fast rate and much of their Russian fueled money is going right back into our treasury to pay for the investigation.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/...-manafort.html

And even if you discredit that Mueller has actually earned more than he's spent, the Trump investigations have spent less than investigations into Reagan, Watergate or Bill Clinton, not even accounting for INFLATION!

On a base level, though, I kind of have a problem in general with investigations that are begun to look for one thing... and just end up finding completely separate things.

No matter how they spin it, nothing that has arisen has anything to do with Russia and Trump. Which was the whole point.

If Hillary is being investigated, so should Trump.

It's a pity some people don't like to play by the rules, but if there's evidence that a crime was committed, let the authorities investigate.

Not quite apples to apples. Hillary was zeroed in on and that was that. Trump... it's, "Let's investigate everyone and everything, even the guy that sold him a donut 2 years ago!"

It's just disingenuous.

Let me explain a little more. I mean, let's pretend I am a governor and tomorrow it is suspected I am a Syrian spy for whatever reason. An investigation is opened strictly to that end... yet, they dig and dig and dig and get nothing, so they turn to my friends. Now my old friend goes to jail because it turns out he made some deal 10 years ago a little funny, or had liaisons with a secret lover or something and that's outed -- anything. But otherwise stuff completely disconnected from the investigation's goal.

Is that right?

I mean, wrong is wrong, and I don't dispute that. If said friend did wrong then that's... wrong. But should he suffer right now because of something completely unrelated, a course set under a banner of something completely different? Is this really something we should be cheering on?

and no one can tell me why everyone is out to get him.

the only reason I can think up, is that 1)he's not 'woke'. 2)He's rich. and therefore, can't be bought or sold as easily as anyone else. 3)He's not your average politician. therefore, a wild card in how he'll react.

all these things seem to scare the bejesus out of everyone. but, entering year 3.....so far, no nuclear war yet.

Its called Google and watching The News you might learn something

What has become of this section? It's looking more and more like a light version of Breitbart.com with its plain hillbilly idiots like Vegita and that big hillbilly idiot posing as an intellectual who is opening all these dumb threads...

Salty that people don't bleat your lefthanded ideology like a good little sheep? :lol:

Woah! Barkworm lives!!:o

amazing how people can label one, just because they mention the name of their most hated enemy :).


https://media.giphy.com/media/3o7522...Bo1G/giphy.gif

Oh noes, more articles of impeachment "introduced" (again):

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/03/polit...ump/index.html

unsubscribed from jonathon frakes on twitter yesterday. when he retweets something like 'jane curtain wants to destroy the republican party' as if it's a good thing, then it's time to cut ties before all respect is lost.

it's amazing how many celebrities go cray cray.

I see he retweeted a gem from Michael Moore, too:

Michael Moore
If only guns were made of romaine lettuce. #recall #ban #33gotsick #33000gotshot

Yikes!

In your scenario, he broke the law, and it was discovered, so... obviously yes?? The means to discovery make no difference. Break the law, pay the price. That's the american justice system for ya.

Mueller Russia investigation extended another 6 months, too:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/04/polit...ury/index.html

That's fine by me. It's already turning a profit for the US.

As opposed the $5 billion Trump wants us to pay for his wall. What happened to Mexico?

A fun read:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/41912...LJBM70Nbe22B3k

That's like the time people were using passages out of Mein Kampf while attributing them to one of the current liberals and people were applauding.

Don't worry all you anti-Trumpers! He'll finally be finished this time!



Such "unbiased" mainstream media journalism...


...I'm still surprised people here are still placing the mainstream media on a pedestal of credibility. :lol:

The problem is there are actual things he's done that they can go after him for. But they focus on his taxes (a rich guy cheating his taxes? Shock) and then they're trying to go after him for this nonsense Russian collusion. They can't even explain how that's illegal. So what if he colluded with Russia to besmirch Hillary Clinton. It's not like the United States has never colluded with a foreign power to influence their elections. Hell, Obozzo made a commercial promoting Macron. That's collusion.

I don't know how anyone can trust the MSM either. 95 percent of the media is owned by 6 corporate entities that are being directly harmed by Trumps protectionist policies... Of course the news is going to have a bias against him. They create narratives. They're not reporting the news.

Trump could cure cancer tomorrow and the media would say he conspired with Russia for it to happen.

Maybe if the cure to cancer is eating a obscene amount of junk food :lol:

anyway, no one learned from the last political thread?