Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

L L wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

"Republican congressmen" AKA "Establishment Republicans" are one of the main reasons Trump got elected... to stop them from surrendering. Don't expect Trump love from that crowd.

Yes. I get that.

I just don't see people from that crowd posting here.

No representation here.

That's because there are none of those people outside of DC. I do not know a single person I would describe as an eRep voter. Not one. Establishment Republicans only had support because their voters thought they were representing them. Over the last 10 years we have all figured out they weren't. The lesser of two evils voting means many will hang around a while, but no one will defend their Dem lite approach.

local lib wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Here is some more economic news that is sure to trigger the lib echo chamber. The economy to grow at a 5.4% GDP rate in the first quarter. Boom!

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/01/economy-to-grow-at-5-point-4-percent-rate-in-first-quarter-atlanta-fed-tracker-shows.html

I hope it does.

Over-heated economy = mass inflation = loss of earnings--pay raises won't keep up = RIP savings.

L L wrote:

I am concerned that we took on large debt during good economic times when now would be the time to pay it down a bit.

Wouldn't you like less national debt?

We didn't take on large debt - the "$1.5 trillion" over 10 years is a completely speculative number which assumes 1.9% annual GDP growth. If we keep beating those growth projections we'll crush the 1.5 trillion estimate too.

DiscoGary wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

Gary - you are a simpleton if you think that is how law is interpreted. Can you prove gross negligence on her part?

Maybe some of our deep state FBI connections can tell us what would happen to them if they put secret documents on their unsecured home computer and exposed it the world's hackers.

I would not make the case that she was negligent, because clearly she INTENDED to hide this server from Congressional oversight. She intended to break the law. If she insists on saying it was accident, then that would trigger the gross negligence clause. There's no way she should have avoided punishment for this.

Schindler's talking about you:

"Anyone who believes the FBI is a conspiratorial den of Hillary-loving lefties has had ZERO interaction with the actual FBI."

nontrumper wrote:

...

Schindler's talking about you:

"Anyone who believes the FBI is a conspiratorial den of Hillary-loving lefties has had ZERO interaction with the actual FBI."

Well everyone in the country just had an interaction with the FBI and we all can see that they conspired to get Hillary off the hook after committing and obvious crime.

DiscoGary wrote:

nontrumper wrote:

...

Schindler's talking about you:

"Anyone who believes the FBI is a conspiratorial den of Hillary-loving lefties has had ZERO interaction with the actual FBI."

Well everyone in the country just had an interaction with the FBI and we all can see that they conspired to get Hillary off the hook after committing and obvious crime.

So, the Republican congress, after multiple investigations, are also covering up her crimes?!

F*ck, I could care less if Clinton is found guilty. Reopen the investigations for all I care. It doesn't dismiss the fact that Trump and his cronies are in bed with Russia. Treason. Justice will prevail.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

obvious problem wrote:

That’s awesome. One for the ages.

Glad you agree, because thats the truth.

Yes sir. Democrats are racist against every race. I’m still waiting for that to sink in.

They want as many welfare ‘slaves’ as possible.

Priceless

DiscoGary wrote:

The word "intent" which is seen in other parts of that law, is not seen here. Comey stated that she violated part 1 of this section, but said she had no intent, therefore no one should prosecute her. Intent was not needed for prosecution.

Comey lied. Justice died. The FBI DID conspire to let Hillary off the hook.

Again, you completely ignored the point of contention.

Explain why an FBI that was completely in the tank for Clinton would release extremely over-hyped and damaging information about her right before the election. Explain why they didn't do the same to Trump when they very well could have. Explain why Clinton and the FBI would conspire to create a fake salacious dossier and then wait until AFTER the election to use it.

I'm not going to play a distractionary game of amateur lawyer on a tangential topic unless you can offer up some responses here.

There were tons of Republicans all over the country that are moderate an do not like Trump.

The Never Trumpers were not restricted to DC and I doubt they are happy now.

But they are generally quiet.

L L wrote:

There were tons of Republicans all over the country that are moderate an do not like Trump.

The Never Trumpers were not restricted to DC and I doubt they are happy now.

But they are generally quiet.

You can certainly find them at various conservative web sites. Red State, National Review, etc. If you want to find Republicans who hate Trump then look there, but I consider a lot of those people to be DC insiders. They are really pissed that their cause has been co-opted by someone they think is intellectually inferior to themselves. They want progress, but only if they get credit for it. It's petty BS. Still, their opinions are valid and they make good points sometimes.

The average voter doesn't care so much if progress comes from Trump or from the CATO institute.

Because Hillary committed a crime and Trump didn't.

There are a ton of pro Hillary (Liberals) posts by people switching user names often that skew the percentages.

You can't have your cake and eat it too LL. I'm slightly right of center and I like you more than some of the extreme right wingers, but fair is fair. nontrumper, rigged for trump, foo, etc...all post under different handles.

Trollminator wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Hillary broke the law with her off site insecure server. She was not prosecuted. Hillary is above the law and it is a very good thing that she did not become president.

That's what I thought, you have no clue what would be considered unlawful.

Says the biggest dipwad on this thread, LOL!!!!! She's a criminal, period. Are you really that stupid trolliboy?

Two way street pal wrote:

There are a ton of pro Hillary (Liberals) posts by people switching user names often that skew the percentages.

You can't have your cake and eat it too LL. I'm slightly right of center and I like you more than some of the extreme right wingers, but fair is fair. nontrumper, rigged for trump, foo, etc...all post under different handles.

Oh, I agree with you there.

I'm just pointing out that the 6 to 2 ratio of anti-Trump to pro-Trump ratio seems off.

The pro-Trump posts keep the thread going.

They are very good at prodding and getting reactions.

I do try to ignore the baiting posts and deal with some substance.

Disco Gary is a genius of mixing total garbage with very logical, intelligent points.

Among the junk there really is a lot of good content here.

This is my best single source of getting objective two-sided views of politics.

Two way street pal wrote:

analytical janx wrote:

3.4% - eric a blair

3.3% - Drink F*** Fight

2.1% - Fat Hurts

2.1% - Flagpole

1.9% - Trollminator

1.7% - LL

1.4% - DiscoGary

1.4% - pop_pop_version 2.whatever

There are a ton of pro Hillary (Liberals) posts by people switching user names often that skew the percentages.

#1 = HardLoper > 10%

nontrumper wrote:

Tweeted by a conservative and former member of the intelligence community:

"Anyone who believes the FBI is a conspiratorial den of Hillary-loving lefties has had ZERO interaction with the actual FBI."

Well, does anyone really need any interaction with the actual FBI in order to understand it?

I mean, Trump knows more about military strategy than any of our generals and he studiously avoided any actual interaction with the military when it came time for the draft.

So I would think that the same principles might apply here. No?

DiscoGary wrote:

Maybe some of our deep state FBI connections can tell us what would happen to them if they put secret documents on their unsecured home computer and exposed it the world's hackers.

I would not make the case that she was negligent, because clearly she INTENDED to hide this server from Congressional oversight. She intended to break the law. If she insists on saying it was accident, then that would trigger the gross negligence clause. There's no way she should have avoided punishment for this.

Exactly! Just 2 words for the lib-taard-ians on this thread. DEEP STATE.

Just remember those two words and it will all suddenly make sense.

DEEP STATE.

.

.

.

Or you can just continue being sheeple.

nontrumper wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Maybe some of our deep state FBI connections can tell us what would happen to them if they put secret documents on their unsecured home computer and exposed it the world's hackers.

I would not make the case that she was negligent, because clearly she INTENDED to hide this server from Congressional oversight. She intended to break the law. If she insists on saying it was accident, then that would trigger the gross negligence clause. There's no way she should have avoided punishment for this.

Schindler's talking about you:

"Anyone who believes the FBI is a conspiratorial den of Hillary-loving lefties has had ZERO interaction with the actual FBI."

You forgot 2 words - DEEP. STATE.

Over Heated wrote:Over-heated economy = mass inflation = loss of earnings--pay raises won't keep up = RIP savings.

You missed my post from the other day, median wages are DOWN. Trump's forgotten voters are getting punished for being anything other than the top 2% in terms of wealth and revenue.