Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

please do it wrote:

You are an American traitor:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-13/russian-breach-of-39-states-threatens-future-u-s-elections

HAAA HAAA HAAAAA....your pu$$y is bruised.😆

What is hilarious is a libbbtwat like you, that has served the USA less than zero days calling someone a "traitor."

You aren't even an American. No libbbtwat is.

Keep the 😢 coming libbbtwats❗️

You guys ready for another giant media FLOP today? One by one, the speculative BS narratives to take Trump down continue to fall.

The political math of this country is quite quirky.

You look at all of the Democrat voters in California vs North and South Dakota yet California gets 2 senators and the Dakotas get 4.

And sure you can compare Texas to Rhode Island and Delaware.

Bu the percent of elected Senators doesn't match the overall voting totals by percent. You can have more total votes for one party yet more elected for the other party.

In the House, Democrat voters are bunched in fewer district while Republican districts are spread out.

That's how you can get more total Democrat votes yet more Republicans elected.

And we know Hillary got millions more votes in the country than Donald.

Plus the Republican held Senate held the SCOTUS seat open for a year and failed their constitutional duty of advising for the nomination.

I can use the same reason for Governors as Senators.

Though governors are different than Washington politicians.

They don't do party politics as much as local politics.

Some Republican governors are much more liberal their their Senate counterparts.

I've lived in Virginia and Maryland and both states (won both times by Obama and last year by Hillary) alternate between Democrat and Republican governors. And their Republican governors are nothing like Republican Senators in their policies.

And to me it's a bit ironic that voters have to adhere to federal laws created mostly by congressman that we had no vote on and those congressman are often extreme in their partisan politics (on both sides).

While governors who serve only those that had a say in them being elected, often have more bi-partisan views.

We would get a better Congress if each state got to nominate their candidates but the whole country got to vote on each congressmen.

Keep the 😭 coming libbbtwat❗️😆

All the excuses in the world won't change a thing😂😂

You LOST little girl....YOU LOST😆

AMERICA FTW😎🇺🇸

Perhaps if you libbbtwats understood the electoral process you'd have a clue. Nope, libbbtwats are to fckn stupid to ever have a grasp of this Republic.

greatest headline, yes

https://twitter.com/ChloeAngyal/status/874332870067793923

Did I hurt your feewings again agip😆

Judging by your pathetic posts I'm going with a resounding YES😎🇺🇸

Barry Bandwidth wrote:

Well, this would be interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/12/politics/ruddy-robert-mueller-white-house/index.html

This sounds unbelievable, but then you ask yourself, "what would a guilty, fascist imbecile with a party full of cowards behind him do?", and then it seems practically inevitable.

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Barry Bandwidth wrote:

Well, this would be interesting.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/12/politics/ruddy-robert-mueller-white-house/index.html

This sounds unbelievable, but then you ask yourself, "what would a guilty, fascist imbecile with a party full of cowards behind him do?", and then it seems practically inevitable.

Parhaps they could rename the investigation a "matter"? Oh, and then turn the indictment from an objective case of whether or not he did something wrong into a subjective assessment of whether or not he "intended to do something wrong"?

But to do this, you just need an old family ally in place.

Sound familiar?

UsoBlind wrote:

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

This sounds unbelievable, but then you ask yourself, "what would a guilty, fascist imbecile with a party full of cowards behind him do?", and then it seems practically inevitable.

Parhaps they could rename the investigation a "matter"? Oh, and then turn the indictment from an objective case of whether or not he did something wrong into a subjective assessment of whether or not he "intended to do something wrong"?

But to do this, you just need an old family ally in place.

Sound familiar?

still don't understand, why, if you (Trump) are not guilty of anything, you'd fire Mueller.

only explanation I can see is you are either really not that smart or you are guilty of something.

I'll say again if you are going to be cleared just let the investigation run it's course.

still don't... wrote:

UsoBlind wrote:

Parhaps they could rename the investigation a "matter"? Oh, and then turn the indictment from an objective case of whether or not he did something wrong into a subjective assessment of whether or not he "intended to do something wrong"?

But to do this, you just need an old family ally in place.

Sound familiar?

still don't understand, why, if you (Trump) are not guilty of anything, you'd fire Mueller.

only explanation I can see is you are either really not that smart or you are guilty of something.

I'll say again if you are going to be cleared just let the investigation run it's course.

say you know you are guilty of tax fraud (because you absolutely know Trump is guilty of tax fraud). But you aren't guilty of collusion with Russia.

What do you do? Do you hope Mueller doesn't sniff around into the messy corners of the trump empire? Or do you fire him and take your chances? Your rationale would be 'I didn't collude with Russia, f him. I'm innocent anyway. '

We all know that independent investigations tend to nose around away from the original subject.

trump's pattern is to fire everyone who investigates/challenges him, so there's clearly a large chance that trump will fire mueller.

yates

bharara

Comey

all investigating trump, all fired.

See a pattern, trumpers? You don't think he's...hiding anything, do you?

UsoBlind wrote:

Parhaps they could rename the investigation a "matter"? Oh, and then turn the indictment from an objective case of whether or not he did something wrong into a subjective assessment of whether or not he "intended to do something wrong"?

But to do this, you just need an old family ally in place.

Sound familiar?

Oh, look, a deflection! See, I'm perfectly willing to say that, based on Comey's testimony, Loretta Lynch probably crossed some lines she shouldn't have. I was also angry when Bill Clinton met with her at the airport, and voiced my displeasure on these boards.

Of course, the difference is that Clinton had been under investigation for YEARS, and we know that nothing much came from the initial email investigation or the reopening of it in October. We know that the Bush administration "lost" 22 MILLION emails sent through a private server and Republicans didn't care. We also know that the Trump administration has already been more careless with classified material than Clinton ever was, and Republicans don't care about that either. So the Clinton investigation was clearly partisan in nature.

Now, would you like to continue talking about the guy who is actually president, or would you like to play another round of "but Hillary..."?

per Gallup

Average approval rating for US presidents June of year 1: 62%

Trump approval now: 37%

What did Churchill say about Americans? that we would eventually do the right thing, after doing every wrong thing first.

Clearly that is happening. Support for trump among independents has collapsed to 31%. Among Repubs it is down to 83% from 89% at inauguration.

It will take some time, but we're getting it right as a nation slowly but surely.

Agip, your never ending tears are what America expects.

Thank you for delivering 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Agip, your never ending tears are what America expects.

Thank you for delivering 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

love your passion, tx

Hey I have an idea. Let’s just throw anything against the wall and see what sticks.

“Influence” didn’t work. “Hacking” didn’t hack it, “interference” and “involvement” were a little weak, how about “ties”? Meh, “ties” was a little vague… oh wait, wait – I Got! “Collusion”!! Now “collusion”… YEA, COLLUSION. We’ll get Comey in there with his “memos,” and then we’ll definitely.. well, we’ll CERTAINLY, ehm…

It didn’t work? Wait, it… it backfired? Wait—WHAT?? Now Comey looks WORSE and Trump looks BETTER???

SHIIIIIIIIIIT!!!

Look, we lost the election (terribly) but OBVIOUSLY it wasn’t because our candidate Cankles Clinton was a total pathological political android built on emotionless scripted lies, okay?

OBVIOUSLY it wasn’t because Hezbollah Hillary has a closet full of skeletons bigger than Central Park. NO, NO… Hillary wasn’t a totally flawed candidate who couldn’t walk 15 feet to a van, who wore anti-seizure glasses, who coughed and hacked and spent more time sleeping in ONE DAY than Trump spent in some WEEKS. No, No…

Hillary wasn’t the issue at all.

IT WAS RUSSIA!! RUSSIA WON TRUMP THE ELECTION!!!

Those evil Russians! Those evil evil Russians that OBVIOUSLY hated Hillary. That OBVIOUSLY Hillary and her peeps never once interacted with in unethical ways...

You know, like when they got close and cuddly with Podesta, and Schumer, and Pelosi and Hillary and Bill? Like when they brokered big expensive uranium deals, and set up cozy board positions, and pumped a cool half million in lucrative speaking fees the Clintons’ way, or when Hillary entered Putin’s “private inner sanctum” - and Russian generally bought and played Hilldog and her cronies??

GUYS, GALS

The Democrats AREN’T Projecting. The Democrats AREN’T accusing Trump of stuff they did to a far worse degree. And certainly, the Media ISN’T operating on a glaring double standard. NOOOO... Everything is GOOD and GREAT, and CNN is just another fair and balanced middle-of-the-political-road news network! :)

But Russia…

Now RUSSIA,

THAT we need to investigate.

Wait—what? “Evidence” ? You want… uhm… you want “evidence”?? No, no, no… We have to INVESTIGATE to find the “evidence”… Don’t you see??

We have to, uhm, erh, durrp, CONTINUE THE INVESTIGATION to find the “evidence,” yea…

YEA. Because, uhm, there’s obviously, uhh, lots of, well there’s a lot of—uh--what you would call, uhmm…

LOOK, SESSIONS!!!!!!!

I served in Afghanistan over ten years ago and saw action in the Nimroz Province (Chakhansur) and Helmand Province (Nawah-ye-Barakai and Marsen). You are exactly what's wrong with America, and I guarantee you never served anything. You are a 4F.

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/337538-russian-cyberattack-on-us-electoral-systems-more-widespread-than-reported