Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

SDSU Aztec wrote:

And yesterday he couldn't admit that he called Tim Cook "Tim Apple":

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) Tweeted:

At a recent round table meeting of business executives, & long after formally introducing Tim Cook of Apple, I quickly referred to Tim + Apple as Tim/Apple as an easy way to save time & words. The Fake News was disparagingly all over this, & it became yet another bad Trump story!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1105109329290686464?s=17

I believe he losing it and it will only get worse.

More and more he reminds me of Flagpole.

Sally Vix wrote:

One thing I find highly humorous is that Flagpole has already listed out about 20 serious crimes that Trump has committed, any one by itself would be grounds for impeachment. And two of the most anti-Trump committee heads in Congress, Jerrold Nadler and Adam Schitt, both just said yesterday that the evidence is not there yet for impeachment. You would think they would be have access to much more evidence than Flagpole has. But, alas, our beloved Flagpole appears to be privy to much more sensitive evidence than even these two highly influential Congresspeople do.

Flagpole doesn’t have evidence. He just has uncorroborated testimony and interviews. It’s a lot of he said/she said and I think ultimately there will be little connecting Trump to anything. His associates are getting bent though.

The most serious concrete crime he’s attached to is Cohen’s FELONY Campaign Finance Violation. Cohen plead guilty and Trump is the unindicted co-conspirator. Trump would be indicted for that if he wasn’t president.

Other than that it’s a sit and wait for the actual evidence to come out from Mueller and SDNY. I could see some Trump family members getting indicted for various things. The issue with Trump is proving he ordered anything.

Also....what in the heck is he trying to accomplish with his budget proposal? He’s walking into another shutdown while trying to cut entitlement programs that some of his voters depend on.

Alan

Yep. And McConnel (sic) is holding Trump on a loose leach (sic) too.

Well, if Trump was a co-conspirator of Felony campaign finance violations, I think that is a serious enough crime to merit impeachment. I am a conservative but would favor House Dems bringing impeachment proceedings against him. The fact that they are not is due to one of two things ... 1) they don't think felony campaign finance violations are impeachable offenses OR 2) Flagpole is full of BS and has no idea what he is talking about. I am more inclined to go with the latter.

1) Good Lord dude. Nothing you have said there is accurate.

2) Where did I say he would not be impeached? Here it is again for you, brother...he will be impeached by the House and either resign or be convicted by the Senate. How much more clear can I be? This is my prediction. This is the political process.

2) He WILL be indicted. This is the legal process. This is LIKELY to happen after he is out of office. It is POSSIBLE that he is indicted while still in office, but I am not predicting that. You do realize he can be impeached, convicted and removed from office by the Senate, and STILL also indicted for crimes, right? And, just to be clear, he will be indicted for something (felony campaign finance violations, other financial crimes) almost IMMEDIATELY after being out of office if he isn't indicted while still in office. I won't need to wait 10 years to be proven right. Now, there might be some additional indictments that come down that much later if he is still alive (RICO might take a while), but he will be indicted for crimes very soon after leaving office.

Do I need to provide pictures for you, brother? If so, that's too bad because of all the many gifts I possess (and man is it a lot!), I do NOT have the gift of drawing. I could make some with computer programs though.

Flagpole wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Dude, if what Mueller reports is really bad, it matters not one iota what she has said previously. As it is it is apparent that he has nothing, i repeat NOTHING, on Trump. So the last 2 years that you Libs have been whining and bellyaching about Trump is all for naught. Cut your losses and go home.

1) Your first sentence is correct technically. Optics are always a thing in politics though, and her stated reluctance to impeach him for so long works in her favor ultimately.

2) The rest is something you need to prove. How do you know Mueller has "nothing" on Trump? Maybe you have knowledge that I do not have. Please elaborate and educate me.

So, Sally Vix, I am always chomping at the bit to learn something new. You said Mueller has "nothing" on Trump, and you felt so strongly that you said, "i[sic] repeat NOTHING." Sounds like a guarantee to me using your definition of it. You have not responded to my query...how do you know Mueller has nothing on Trump? So far your silence is telling. Appears to me that you don't have any proof or reason to back up that statement at all. Again, care to educate me?

You can add that tRunp plans to classify Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations. That way he believes--or his racist, Stephen Miller believes-- he can ban all Mexicans from America. But only Mexican drug cartels. American Drug Cartels are okay because they supply satisfaction to rich people like himself.

Sally Vix wrote:

1) they don't think felony campaign finance violations are impeachable offenses..

Nope. That is an impeachable offense because the intent was to steal an election.

steal wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

1) they don't think felony campaign finance violations are impeachable offenses..

Nope. That is an impeachable offense because the intent was to steal an election.

I agree but evidently, Jarrold Nadler, Adam Schitt and Nancy Pelosi don't agree with Flagpole. Flagpole needs to get on the phone and tell these three to get their arse in gear and throw the felon out of office!

There is no IF. Trump is Individual-1. Cohen acted at the behest of Individual-1. These things are facts.

Impeachment is a political process not a legal one. I think many Dems remember how Clinton lied under oath. it was on tape, yet he had no chance of Senate conviction and after that failure his popularity went up. Granted that was 20 years ago. It went up to 73% then down to 65% by the time he left office. He had the highest approval of any president leaving office since Truman. But again Trump isn’t Clinton and we didn’t have the 24 hour wall to wall multiple source firehouse of political talking heads like we have now.

Alan

Sally Vix wrote:

steal wrote:

Nope. That is an impeachable offense because the intent was to steal an election.

I agree but evidently, Jarrold Nadler, Adam Schitt and Nancy Pelosi don't agree with Flagpole. Flagpole needs to get on the phone and tell these three to get their arse in gear and throw the felon out of office!

Nadler, Schiff, and Pelosi all know it would be a politically foolish move to start impeachment without senate Republicans on board. So it's off the table for now.

But that is likely to change when the president is indicted. He will be thrown out of office as he is thrown into prison.

Sally Vix wrote:

Well, if Trump was a co-conspirator of Felony campaign finance violations, I think that is a serious enough crime to merit impeachment. I am a conservative but would favor House Dems bringing impeachment proceedings against him. The fact that they are not is due to one of two things ... 1) they don't think felony campaign finance violations are impeachable offenses OR 2) Flagpole is full of BS and has no idea what he is talking about. I am more inclined to go with the latter.

You started off with such promise. Your first TWO sentences are good and proper. Then, you fall apart.

1) They don't think felony campaign finance violations are impeachable offenses? Well, some won't but that's not why they haven't started the impeachment process yet (officially...I mean to be clear, the investigation they have going on now with bringing in witnesses is all about getting ducks in a row to begin the impeachment process). They haven't started because they are waiting for the Mueller Report.

2) Whether or not I am full of BS has no bearing on what the House might do. I'm not sure you meant to say that, but you clearly said that one reason the House hasn't started the impeachment process is because I am full of BS. How can that be? Ten percent of them don't even know who I am!

Fat hurts wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

I agree but evidently, Jarrold Nadler, Adam Schitt and Nancy Pelosi don't agree with Flagpole. Flagpole needs to get on the phone and tell these three to get their arse in gear and throw the felon out of office!

Nadler, Schiff, and Pelosi all know it would be a politically foolish move to start impeachment without senate Republicans on board. So it's off the table for now.

But that is likely to change when the president is indicted. He will be thrown out of office as he is thrown into prison.

The president will NOT be indicted while he is in office. Mueller knows that, Pelosi that, Nadler knows that, Schitt knows that and the Department of Justice KNOWS THAT. That is their policy and Bill Barr is on-board with that. NO way in helll will he allow Trump to be indicted as a sitting president What happens after he leaves office is anyone's guess but he will not be indicted as president.

Notice that those calling for impeachment now are the young and inexperienced while those who are saying “not yet” are the old and wise. There is a reason for that. They know how to play the game. Say no now, then say they had no choice when the evidence is presented.

Alan

I didn't really mean you were full of BS. I retract that statement. But, I am fairly certain the Mueller report will be nothing. And I apologize for the BS comment.

Sally Vix wrote:

steal wrote:

Nope. That is an impeachable offense because the intent was to steal an election.

I agree but evidently, Jarrold Nadler, Adam Schitt and Nancy Pelosi don't agree with Flagpole. Flagpole needs to get on the phone and tell these three to get their arse in gear and throw the felon out of office!

1) Glad you agree that it is an impeachable offense. You are RIGHT on that.

2) Nadler, SCHIFF (don't be sophomoric), and Pelosi are playing politics here. They can't seem like they are out for blood. Makes their case stronger if they wait until they at least have Mueller's report.

3) I am also wanting to wait until we have the Mueller report (unless something else very egregious comes out before then).

What an idiot!!

The tweets about climate change and having too much technology in planes are very scary. And this is the guy leading our country forward?

The Tim Apple tweet is just petty. Any other POTUS would either ignore the criticism or simply admit they made a mistake.

Ok. I accept your apology, but I wasn't angling for that. My point was about your debating skills there. THAT is something you should apologize for.

foo wrote:

What an idiot!!

The tweets about climate change and having too much technology in planes are very scary. And this is the guy leading our country forward?

The Tim Apple tweet is just petty. Any other POTUS would either ignore the criticism or simply admit they made a mistake.

It may sound crazy to educated people, but to a lot of mouth breathers out there, especially those that don’t believe in the moon landings and climate change, he is right on point. Beware of sophisticated liberals trying to transform your world!