Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Will Mueller put a squeeze on Manafort to give up Trump?

Manafort is in bad shape right now.

He has been under surveillance for a while for illegal dealings with Russia. They have raided his house and tapped his phones.

I think they have a lot of dirt on him to send him away for a long time.

He was Trump's campaign manager.

And we know Russia did all they could to interfere with our election and put fake news stories on social media hurting Hillary Clinton.

If Trump colluded with Russia in any way it would likely have been through Manafort and Flynn, who is also under investigation.

Could they cut a deal with Manafort to get immunity if he testifies against Trump?

Getting Trump would obviously be a much bigger deal.

Would Manafort actually go to jail to not snitch on Trump?

The screws are turning.

[quote

For the 60th time. Yup. Another failure is eminent. Your Cheeto will blame McConnell. The nasty Trump Tweets are a'coming.[/quote]

imminent: likely to occur at any moment

eminent: well-known and respected

It is well known that another repeal will fail, grammar troll.

zzzzzzz wrote:

[quote

For the 60th time. Yup. Another failure is eminent. Your Cheeto will blame McConnell. The nasty Trump Tweets are a'coming.

imminent: likely to occur at any moment

eminent: well-known and respected[/quote]

All we know is Manafort was wire tapped. Not Trump.

exthrower wrote:

Both Clapper and Comey lied under oath saying there was no wiretapping and no FISA warrants...Now we see Trump was right about the Obama people wiretapping his phones...

We are probably just going to have to agree to have different interpretations of this, but Clapper said there was no wiretapping/FISA against Trump or his campaign. I would argue that just because someone is employed by the campaign, and is being monitored, does not mean that the campaign itself is being monitored. Given that the monitoring of Manafort started before he was involved in the campaign, it's a stretch to say that he was monitored because he was part of the campaign.

Count Chocula wrote:

exthrower wrote:

Both Clapper and Comey lied under oath saying there was no wiretapping and no FISA warrants...Now we see Trump was right about the Obama people wiretapping his phones...

We are probably just going to have to agree to have different interpretations of this, but Clapper said there was no wiretapping/FISA against Trump or his campaign. I would argue that just because someone is employed by the campaign, and is being monitored, does not mean that the campaign itself is being monitored. Given that the monitoring of Manafort started before he was involved in the campaign, it's a stretch to say that he was monitored because he was part of the campaign.

Add that the government was aware of a secret server in Trump tower that was communicating with a Russian bank, one the mobsters, like Putin, use. Why the need for a super-secret server--one that is out of the normal internet; something working in a dark web manor?

What kind of information?

Information that was Trump was working with the Russians.

Are you concerned that Obama gleaned that?

Didn't Trump always insist Manafort was nothing but a consultant? Which was technically true, especially since he did not spend much time on the campaign team. So now Trumpkins want to conveniently claim he worked for Trump.

Count Chocula wrote:

exthrower wrote:

Both Clapper and Comey lied under oath saying there was no wiretapping and no FISA warrants...Now we see Trump was right about the Obama people wiretapping his phones...

We are probably just going to have to agree to have different interpretations of this, but Clapper said there was no wiretapping/FISA against Trump or his campaign. I would argue that just because someone is employed by the campaign, and is being monitored, does not mean that the campaign itself is being monitored. Given that the monitoring of Manafort started before he was involved in the campaign, it's a stretch to say that he was monitored because he was part of the campaign.

Well known wrote:

It is well known that another repeal will fail, grammar troll.

zzzzzzz wrote:

[quote

For the 60th time. Yup. Another failure is eminent. Your Cheeto will blame McConnell. The nasty Trump Tweets are a'coming.

imminent: likely to occur at any moment

eminent: well-known and respected

It is tragic that so many (including you) are so insecure that they immediately resort to a defensive position whenever someone attempts to help them.

zzzzzzz wrote:

Well known wrote:

It is well known that another repeal will fail, grammar troll.

imminent: likely to occur at any moment

eminent: well-known and respected

It is tragic that so many (including you) are so insecure that they immediately resort to a defensive position whenever someone attempts to help them.[/quote]

Ah, the world's most insecure people are those with a desperate need to point out grammar errors to others. And, it seems you are the one taking a defensive, snowflake-like, position.

The screws are indeed turning. The Trumpsters here have gotten their confidence in their man Trump back because the spotlight hasn't been on him for a while due to major hurricanes and earthquakes. But, it's bad. Trump is not in a good spot. And the thing is that he is such a fool that he is incapable of righting the ship...he just doesn't have it in him.

He will not make it to the end of his first term. The legitimacy of his presidency will be greatly called into question, and even though there isn't a mechanism in place to allow Hillary Clinton to take his place once he is booted or resigns in disgrace, that's what should happen. Probably a good topic for a new amendment (if a President is elected and found to have cheated in any way or a third party rigged the election against the opponent, then the opponent takes over as president once the big fake orange one is removed).

Will be interesting to see if Pence gets caught up in all this too; we could see President Ryan or even a Democrat if this happens after the 2018 elections.

exthrower wrote:

L L wrote:

All we know is Manafort was wire tapped. Not Trump.

Manafort was campaign manager and must of had hundreds of conversations with Trump...and they were undoubtedly tapped....For a party to wiretap the opposition during an election is outragious....Does anyone doubt that information gleaned was transmitted to Obama?

So the Democratic Party wiretapped Manafort?

exthrower wrote:

L L wrote:

All we know is Manafort was wire tapped. Not Trump.

Manafort was campaign manager and must of had hundreds of conversations with Trump...and they were undoubtedly tapped....For a party to wiretap the opposition during an election is outragious....Does anyone doubt that information gleaned was transmitted to Obama?

Again, Manafort was under investigation (and under monitoring) for several years before he joined the Trump campaign. Was the FBI supposed to stop doing their job because Manafort joined a political campaign?

Grammar Skool Trolls wrote:

zzzzzzz wrote:

It is tragic that so many (including you) are so insecure that they immediately resort to a defensive position whenever someone attempts to help them.

Ah, the world's most insecure people are those with a desperate need to point out grammar errors to others. And, it seems you are the one taking a defensive, snowflake-like, position.[/quote]

Ah, and another tragic victim chimes in. Only the tragically insecure could interpret someone lending a bit of help in mastering the English language as "a desperate need".

I pity you. I also wish you the best and hope that better days lie ahead for you.

Fpole detector wrote:

male pattern baldness wrote:

I'd love to find out what a fly on your/exthrower/DiscoGary's wall observes when Dump gets impeached and when the GOP implodes upon its own corruption.

Hi Flagpole!

Nope.

WEJO, DO AN IP CHECK, AND IF I LIE, BAN ME FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

L L wrote:

All we know is Manafort was wire tapped. Not Trump.

Yep. Also, OBAMA didn't do any wiretapping anyway. National security agencies did that.

zzzzzzz wrote:

Ah, and another tragic victim chimes in. Only the tragically insecure could interpret someone lending a bit of help in mastering the English language as "a desperate need".

I pity you. I also wish you the best and hope that better days lie ahead for you.

^An easily triggered grammar troll.

Flagpole wrote:

Fpole detector wrote:

Hi Flagpole!

Nope.

WEJO, DO AN IP CHECK, AND IF I LIE, BAN ME FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

99% of the time that troll you just responded to is HardLoper. He post under a bigly number of different names in this thread; well over 100 is my guess.

Flagpole wrote:

L L wrote:

All we know is Manafort was wire tapped. Not Trump.

Yep. Also, OBAMA didn't do any wiretapping anyway. National security agencies did that.

Yes, any they had to present a legal case for the wire tapping. If Trump wanted to wire tap someone he seems likely to write himself an Executive Order to allow him to skip that legal approval process.