Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

why is it so hard for people to understand that evidence is not made public?

They should do so or shut up. In the end this matter is decided by the american voters.

Why so impatient? If Trump is going to be impeached or indicted, don't you want the case to be properly prepared and vetted?

And if it turns out that there isn't enough evidence to impeach or indict, don't you want the case to be dropped? I do. But that can't happen over night.

Determinations of this magnitude take time.

54re wrote:

How do you know there are crimes?

Are you saying that somebody can just say that the presidents did some crimes and that's it?

Fascists can't stand it, but, at some level we are still a nation of laws with an independent judicial process. That's how one knows there was a crime committed.

Nobody knows today what if any crimes have been committed and by whom. We wait until facts are collected and potentially a judicial process is begun.

At some point, the majority of Trump voters will be deeply betrayed. We're just not there yet.

eric a blair wrote:

I'm going to call that unresponsive.

You seem to be arguing that whether the president committed crimes or not, it doesn't matter if he wins reelection.

You seem to be saying that presidents should not be investigated by law enforcement or congress for crimes and ethical lapses.

you saying that?

I am saying that the proof needs to be presented. Nobody or no small group of people can have the power to just say the president is a criminal.

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

I'm going to call that unresponsive.

You seem to be arguing that whether the president committed crimes or not, it doesn't matter if he wins reelection.

You seem to be saying that presidents should not be investigated by law enforcement or congress for crimes and ethical lapses.

you saying that?

I am saying that the proof needs to be presented. Nobody or no small group of people can have the power to just say the president is a criminal.

agreed. Right now law enforcement agencies and congress are determining whether or not there is evidence of a crime or serious ethical lapse. They are keeping what they know secret as they work on the case. These people saying "there is no evidence" somehow think all evidence is made public. Surely you aren't one of those morans.

But that doesn't explain at all your view that all this is up to the American voter. That makes no sense.

eric a blair wrote:

But that doesn't explain at all your view that all this is up to the American voter. That makes no sense.

It is. Why would the media produce all this political pressure, if it wasn't?

As long as there is no proof of anything the voter is the one who decides.

Fascists can't stand it but an investigation needs to have a basis in a reasonable suspicion. To be more concrete, an investigation must be based on "specific and articulable facts". Obviously the screaming left cannot point to any crime that has been committed (in contrast to Hillary's mail server case). So what are the specific facts that form the basis for an investigation of President Trump. Can the liberal crazies at least articulate those for us?

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

But that doesn't explain at all your view that all this is up to the American voter. That makes no sense.

It is. Why would the media produce all this political pressure, if it wasn't?

As long as there is no proof of anything the voter is the one who decides.

the american voter has no say in what the FBI finds and presents to a grand jury. The american voter has no say in what the House writes into the articles of impeachment. The american voter has no say in whether the senate votes to convict the president and remove him. The american voter has no say in whether the VP and cabinet agree that the president has to be removed. The American voter has no say in whether 2/3rds of the House and Senate agree that the president has to be removed...

Seriously. I don't understand your argument. You seem not to understand representative government. We elect leaders. They make all the decisions for us.

Seems simple to me - you really don't see it that way?

give us the facts wrote:

Fascists can't stand it but an investigation needs to have a basis in a reasonable suspicion. To be more concrete, an investigation must be based on "specific and articulable facts". Obviously the screaming left cannot point to any crime that has been committed (in contrast to Hillary's mail server case). So what are the specific facts that form the basis for an investigation of President Trump. Can the liberal crazies at least articulate those for us?

So sorry...the FBI, republicans in the house, republicans in the senate, the NSA and other groups have chosen not to share their evidence with me. As soon as they do, I'll answer your question.

eric a blair wrote:

the american voter has no say in what the FBI finds and presents to a grand jury. The american voter has no say in what the House writes into the articles of impeachment. The american voter has no say in whether the senate votes to convict the president and remove him. The american voter has no say in whether the VP and cabinet agree that the president has to be removed. The American voter has no say in whether 2/3rds of the House and Senate agree that the president has to be removed...

Seriously. I don't understand your argument. You seem not to understand representative government. We elect leaders. They make all the decisions for us.

Seems simple to me - you really don't see it that way?

The american voter needs to see the evidence.

Boy the bar has been set amazingly low for Trump by Trump supporters.

None of them post in that he is honorable or honest or even a great president.They don't address or even care about that.

They post in with arguments on why he won't get impeached.

That bar is set low.

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

the american voter has no say in what the FBI finds and presents to a grand jury. The american voter has no say in what the House writes into the articles of impeachment. The american voter has no say in whether the senate votes to convict the president and remove him. The american voter has no say in whether the VP and cabinet agree that the president has to be removed. The American voter has no say in whether 2/3rds of the House and Senate agree that the president has to be removed...

Seriously. I don't understand your argument. You seem not to understand representative government. We elect leaders. They make all the decisions for us.

Seems simple to me - you really don't see it that way?

The american voter needs to see the evidence.

well, presumably they will be written into the articles of impeachment, and presumably the senate trial will be televised.

that satisfy you?

eric a blair wrote:

well, presumably they will be written into the articles of impeachment, and presumably the senate trial will be televised.

that satisfy you?

Yes, but this is not the case here.

The political enemy is just trying to maximize the negative publicity.

Agree wrote:

LaughingOutLoud wrote:

Agip (aka "eric a blair") is really throwing a hissy fit.

Agree! That gay/tranny still thinks Hillary will be made president.

Nothing better than watching Hillary lovers continue to have meltdowns!

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

well, presumably they will be written into the articles of impeachment, and presumably the senate trial will be televised.

that satisfy you?

Yes, but this is not the case here.

The political enemy is just trying to maximize the negative publicity.

you have changed your argument.

you now are whining that it is unfair that bad news is printed on your man.

welcome to the big leagues, son. That's how it works in these parts.

man up.

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

the american voter has no say in what the FBI finds and presents to a grand jury. The american voter has no say in what the House writes into the articles of impeachment. The american voter has no say in whether the senate votes to convict the president and remove him. The american voter has no say in whether the VP and cabinet agree that the president has to be removed. The American voter has no say in whether 2/3rds of the House and Senate agree that the president has to be removed...

Seriously. I don't understand your argument. You seem not to understand representative government. We elect leaders. They make all the decisions for us.

Seems simple to me - you really don't see it that way?

The american voter needs to see the evidence.

Yeah, you're right we need to see the evidence. But not before hearings and / or a trial.

Your arguments remind me of Mr. Obvious' arguments.

Just an FYI, you're not likely to get to see evidence prior to hearings or a trial if you're not in the NSA, CIA, FBI, or congress. How do Trumpers not understand the basic processes of the government and legal system? Their ignorance on such topics seem to be one of the main reasons they are so BUTTHURT that Obama and Hilary never went to trial / jail for anything. It's because despite what right wing fake news tells you there really isn't any credible evidence either of them did anything wrong.

Trump on the other hand...we'll, the jury is still out so to speak.

eric a blair wrote:

you have changed your argument.

you now are whining that it is unfair that bad news is printed on your man.

welcome to the big leagues, son. That's how it works in these parts.

man up.

Without evidence there is no sane basis for this kind of news.

eric a blair wrote:

give us the facts wrote:

Fascists can't stand it but an investigation needs to have a basis in a reasonable suspicion. To be more concrete, an investigation must be based on "specific and articulable facts". Obviously the screaming left cannot point to any crime that has been committed (in contrast to Hillary's mail server case). So what are the specific facts that form the basis for an investigation of President Trump. Can the liberal crazies at least articulate those for us?

So sorry...the FBI, republicans in the house, republicans in the senate, the NSA and other groups have chosen not to share their evidence with me. As soon as they do, I'll answer your question.

Just like I thought. You don't even have reasonable suspicion to back your demands. Well then, little boy, you cannot have any investigation either. No crime, no reasonable suspicion = no cake for you, kid.

Sorry if this goes way over your head.

give us the facts wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

So sorry...the FBI, republicans in the house, republicans in the senate, the NSA and other groups have chosen not to share their evidence with me. As soon as they do, I'll answer your question.

Just like I thought. You don't even have reasonable suspicion to back your demands. Well then, little boy, you cannot have any investigation either. No crime, no reasonable suspicion = no cake for you, kid.

Sorry if this goes way over your head.

eh? Sure I have reasonable suspicion. First of all, if republicans in the house and republicans in the senate are investigating the president and his people, that's pretty much all I need. Investigatinng your own party is difficult to do, so that's a pretty good clue that people in the know have seen some nasty stuff.

Same with the FBI. Same with the NSA. That they have very large investigations going on tells us that this is not fake news. They can't share thier evidence during an investigation obvi.

then we can get into teh things we do know.

-multiuple trumpers lied about meeting with russians, to the point of perjury

-trump has admitted to trying to influence the fbi investigation, first with charm, and then by firing the FBI director

-all intel agencies agree the russiand tried to influence the eleciton

-multiple trumpers have worked for russia or FSU nations.

I could go on, but all that is good enough for any reasonable citizen to have reasonable suspicion of the WH, deserving of an investigation.

if you think it is not reasonable suspicion...you are a partisan and should reconsider your life choices.

54re wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

you have changed your argument.

you now are whining that it is unfair that bad news is printed on your man.

welcome to the big leagues, son. That's how it works in these parts.

man up.

Without evidence there is no sane basis for this kind of news.

if you want a nice compliant press, unwilling to print news they find, then I suggest you move to North Korea. You will be happier there. Here in America the press has the responsibility to publish what they know to be true. They know they serve as a critical check on the government.

And we do have evidence. See my post directly above.