Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

DiscoGary wrote:

L L wrote:

A major part of concluding the investigation is having Trump's testimony.

...

Nonsense. If they think they have evidence that you committed a murder, they won't wait for an interview before charging you.

Well, this isn't a murder investigation.

This is an investigation of Russian interference with the election and anyone's involvement.

And there have been several indictments.

But as Rudy pointed out, even if Donald murdered someone he couldn't be charged with murder.

He'd have to be impeached.

This is a political process.

Yeah. And you'll notice how I shut them down in those other threads after challenging them to back up their accusations. That happens a lot with Liberals. You farm out your thinking to people who have more credentials than me, but it turns out the credentialed class isn't even trying to get anything right. They are just trying to keep you fooled, to keep you on the Liberal ranch, so when I push back you got nothing. It should humiliate you into doing some of your own homework, but it's just too easy to find another talking point that allows you to maintain the illusion that you still got it right.

Gary is like warlock of the Midwest in the land of Oz. rojo asked a retweeted question and Gary is melting before our very eyes.

When the investigation finally comes out there will be nothing left but a steaming black puddle.

...but the emails Hillary....ahhhhhhhhgggg

the word for gary is troll. he's having a piss, as they say.

DiscoGary wrote:

Who should I trust?

Who should you trust?

1) Republican, former marine, and war hero Robert Mueller.

2) Republican Rod Rosenstein.

3) Republican Christopher Wray.

4) The FBI and the DOJ which are both made up of mostly Republicans including the rank and file.

5) The legal process which has lots of checks and balances including the ability to appeal.

6) Witnesses who will have corroborating evidence who turn on the President.

The alternative is to trust Donald Trump, a guy who:

1) Is a fact-checked serial liar.

2) Hasn't put Hillary in jail when he said he would.

3) Hasn't made Mexico pay for a wall when he said he would (he's not even pursing it).

4) Hasn't given us his taxes after he said he would.

5) Has ripped of countless individuals and companies, had to pay $25 million because of the fraudulent Trump University and is currently being sued by the state of New York over his fraudulent practices with regard to his supposedly charitable Trump Organization.

If Donald Trump came to you with a business idea he wanted you to invest in, would you do it?

He pulled the wool over your eyes, DG. It's not a shame to admit it. Bill Clinton fooled me, and I admit it. Al Franken fooled me and I admit it. You have been FOOLED by Donald Trump. He's not a good businessman. He's a criminal of epic proportions, and he's a con man. You can NOT trust that guy.

Find a new champion who isn't a criminal who supports your views. Donald Trump is the wrong one to follow.

Mueller and/or the Southern District of New York is going to bring him down.

L L wrote:

But as Rudy pointed out, even if Donald murdered someone he couldn't be charged with murder.

He'd have to be impeached.

This is a political process.

WELL, if a President actually murders someone in office, that MIGHT be challenged to the Supreme Court. We don't have legal precedent set. HOWEVER, if they just impeach and convict him quickly, he could be charged after that, and since that's the path of least resistance, that could happen.

rojo wrote:

I'll admit I haven't been on this thread.

I'm curious as to how Trump supporters would respond to the following:

https://twitter.com/Mikel_Jollett/status/1016548011155918848?s=20

Rojo,

I am glad you posted. It APPEARS by asking how Trump supporters would respond to your link that that you are NOT a Trump supporter, and for that you get my respect. I hope I am not somehow wrong about that for Trump is not worthy of support or any level of respect.

Not in Kansas wrote:

...

When the investigation finally comes out there will be nothing left but a steaming black puddle.

...

When it comes out it will say absolutely nothing and no charges will be filed, but it will appear to make Trump look guilty as hell so that everyone caught in the Liberal media rat maze can riot in the streets protesting how Trump got away with colluding with Russians to steal the election. You will never know that Trump is innocent. They will keep that from you.

How do I know all this? Because that is what they MUST do. There is no other path.

Another point to Gary.

Dude, you realize you can dislike multiple things, right? Just because you don't like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama does not mean you have to like Trump, especially when he has given any thinking human so many reasons not to like him.

Example time.

I do not like licorice or eggplant. One is a candy and one a fruit masquerading as a vegetable (it is not a vegetable). On differing ends of the edible world spectrum. My dislike of one does not mean I have to like the other.

Donald Trump is not worthy of your respect and your support. He's not playing any kind of chess. He's not smart. He's not educated in the ways he needs to be to be President, and he is famously unwilling to learn anything about how to do the job. He's a bad businessman. He's a serial liar. He's a racist and a sexist and a misogynist. He's a conman. He's very likely a traitor.

Come on, brother...you know I'm right. Make that leap. It's not one of faith either. It is one of common sense. Do it. Admit he's bad for America, bad for conservatism, bad for the world. Again, you know it to be true.

DiscoGary wrote:

Not in Kansas wrote:

...

When the investigation finally comes out there will be nothing left but a steaming black puddle.

...

When it comes out it will say absolutely nothing and no charges will be filed, but it will appear to make Trump look guilty as hell so that everyone caught in the Liberal media rat maze can riot in the streets protesting how Trump got away with colluding with Russians to steal the election. You will never know that Trump is innocent. They will keep that from you.

How do I know all this? Because that is what they MUST do. There is no other path.

Let's be clear here.

You believe no charges will be filed. Do you also believe impeachment proceedings will not begin? If they do begin, will it end in conviction in the Senate?

How will the report make Trump look "guilty as hell" but then no action is taken?

So, Trump will be innocent of all things but the report will somehow make him look guilty, but he will really be innocent and "they" (whoever "they" are) will keep it from us?

I don't follow. Would appreciate some elaboration here.

Say What ???? Say What????? wrote:

Idiot Flagpole wrote:

Yep, criminal behavior has consequences;)

Say What?????? This didn't bother you, except that she lost, so why does the WINNER Trump bother you?

Did you see what your girl did before running for Office, or did you look the other way because she was your "party flavor"?

Great post and great links, agip loves them, keep them coming!

DiscoGary wrote:

Yeah. And you'll notice how I shut them down in those other threads after challenging them to back up their accusations. That happens a lot with Liberals. You farm out your thinking to people who have more credentials than me, but it turns out the credentialed class isn't even trying to get anything right. They are just trying to keep you fooled, to keep you on the Liberal ranch, so when I push back you got nothing. It should humiliate you into doing some of your own homework, but it's just too easy to find another talking point that allows you to maintain the illusion that you still got it right.

Gary, I haven't seen you shut anyone down, really. You certainly claim that you do, but I really haven't seen it.

You are spouting nonsense with everything you said. Your tirade about "liberals" and the credentialed class is humorous. It really shows how delusional you are.

I would guess you have no real credentials, do you? Any degrees? Any state licenses? Do you have anything to prove you hold any real responsibility in your life? Or are you just a bitter, cynical, unaccomplished American?

Well maybe those other guys are just taking a real long time to formulate a coherent response. BTW. Do you know how to determine when you've finally won an internet argument? When the other guy wants to know who you are. That means they have given up on logic and have to resort to personal insults.

Oh and online hackademics with big time credentials are the easiest to defeat because in "real life" they use their credentials as a hammer to silence those without any. The result is that they lack the discipline necessary to defend their ideas in an environment where credentials are useless. They find out very quickly that sneering condescension doesn't work in online debates.

Sorry, but going to have to correct you on this. People are VERY often mistaken on this particular (terribly important) point so you may be excused for getting it wrong.

The important point to recognize is that "fruits" and "vegetables" are NOT mutually exclusive terms. Something can be BOTH a fruit and vegetable and indeed many things are (including eggplant and the oft-cited example, tomatoes).

Note that "fruit" has a very specific scientific definition which involves the part of the plant. The definition has NOTHING to do with how (or if) the fruit is consumed by humans.

"In botany, a fruit is the seed-bearing structure in flowering plants (also known as angiosperms) formed from the ovary after flowering. "

On the other hand, vegetable is NOT a scientific term and is in reference to how (or if) the vegetable is consumed by humans.

"Vegetables are parts of plants that are consumed by humans as food as part of a meal. The original term is still commonly used and is applied to plants collectively to refer to all edible plant matter, including the flowers, fruits, stems, leaves, roots, and seeds. The alternate definition of the term vegetable is applied somewhat arbitrarily, often by culinary and cultural tradition. It may exclude foods derived from some plants that are fruits, nuts, and cereal grains, but include fruits from others such as tomatoes and courgettes and seeds such as pulses. "

So, to say that eggplant (or tomato) is a fruit and not a vegetable is essentially equivalent to saying that a particular article of furniture is black and therefore not a chair. The terms are not mutually exclusive and in fact refer to entirely different characteristics of the item involved. In one case, "use for human consumption" vs "part of the plant"; in the other case "color" versus "typical use by humans in furnishing".

///

So, now you know the truth about this nonsense regarding "is a tomato a fruit or a vegetable?" (It is BOTH). Of course, I know that it is not your style to admit error so I do not expect you to do so here. However, I hope that in the future you will refrain from the fruit vs vegetable nonsense.

Most respectfully,

Excessively Large Lower Extremities

Flagpole wrote:

rojo wrote:

I'll admit I haven't been on this thread.

I'm curious as to how Trump supporters would respond to the following:

https://twitter.com/Mikel_Jollett/status/1016548011155918848?s=20

Rojo,

I am glad you posted. It APPEARS by asking how Trump supporters would respond to your link that that you are NOT a Trump supporter, and for that you get my respect. I hope I am not somehow wrong about that for Trump is not worthy of support or any level of respect.

Rojo is a conservative and republican. At least that's how he seems to me after the 10+ years I have been on these boards. But he is not a Trumper. Only Trumpers believe that all Republicans will follow them of the Trump Cliff. That is not the case.

DiscoGary wrote:

Well maybe those other guys are just taking a real long time to formulate a coherent response. BTW. Do you know how to determine when you've finally won an internet argument? When the other guy wants to know who you are. That means they have given up on logic and have to resort to personal insults.

Gary, you always have an excuse. Maybe they're taking a longtime to respond? I'm referring to arguments you've lost that have come and gone. You aren't shy about trying to sound intelligent about topics you just glean for information.

Your assertion that you've won when someone wants to know who you are is completely false. Sadly, I know you're a troll and I keep feeding you.

Again, you fail to respond to my original question asking you to provide some legitimacy to your arguments, since they lack substance, but you can't.

Solid effort, bro. 3/10.

Herewegoagain! wrote:

...

You aren't shy about trying to sound intelligent about topics you just glean for information.

...

So you think I sound intelligent about topics. Well it's very nice of you to say so, and it's the kind of thing that will help bring people together in this hour distrust and chaos.

For my part I think you have excellent sentence structure and I'd definitely put your IQ somewhere above 100. I think we're going to get along fine! But I still don't care who you are or what you do.

DiscoGary wrote:

Herewegoagain! wrote:

...

You aren't shy about trying to sound intelligent about topics you just glean for information.

...

So you think I sound intelligent about topics. Well it's very nice of you to say so, and it's the kind of thing that will help bring people together in this hour distrust and chaos.

For my part I think you have excellent sentence structure and I'd definitely put your IQ somewhere above 100. I think we're going to get along fine! But I still don't care who you are or what you do.

Yeah, Gary...that wasn't a compliment. Quite the opposite.

You aren't shy about trying to sound intelligent about topics you just glean for information.. Emphasis corrected.