Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:

Doesn’t matter, in the end no indictments [of Trump] from this report.

Because their policy was that they do not indict a sitting president.

Not because there was no reason to indict.

Sorry for the double post but he should of put a concrete answer to it. Heck, they spent 2 and a half years investigating it. Dershowitz thinks he had team members who were strongly insisting putting a charge to the President and Meuller wasn’t fully on board or thought it was a stretch. That prompted Meuller to let DOJ have the final call. In my opinion too much money was spent to come up with nothing.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Me thinks Mueller will be talking to Congress soon so there’s no “public confusion”.

Alan

Again, anyone ever heard him talk since this started?

Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:

The details is [sic] for Congress to knit pick.

The word is "nitpick."

Anyone notice rising gas prices?

Trump's fault.

Because he didn't want Obama to get credit for the Iran deal, he tore it up and put in sanctions.

The ban to purchase Iranian oil went into effect today.

The lead up to the ban caused oil and gas prices to rise.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-sanctions-decision/the-debate-behind-trumps-move-to-tighten-iran-oil-sanctions-idUSKCN1S735N?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29

That offsets any tax cuts that the middle class may have received.

But helps people invested in Saudi oil.

agip wrote:

It burns...IT BURNS

https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1123381852948041730

Perhaps you should read the actual articles on this instead of getting your news from Twitter (remember the Russians are out there). You may learn something.

Flagpole wrote:

Except we know that Trump did NOT get straight A's or even all A's . . . .

Okay, I'm genuinely confused. What's the difference between "straight A's" and "all A's"? I've always understood those as synonyms.

Good for her. I've known several exceptionally "book smart" people in my life and they've shared a similar path to your wife's. They excelled in academics in high school, college, and post-grad work and got multiple degrees (I know an extremely brilliant guy who got 5 graduate degrees). Then when they were finished with academics they felt lost and didn't know what to do with their lives since academics was the only thing they excelled in and that part of their life was over. Bounced around from career to career never really finding that feeling of accomplishment they felt from academics. Some compare it to professional athletes retiring from sports. They don't know what to do with their lives since that sport is all they've known since an early age and is what defined them.

Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Mueller is a bit passive aggressive on obstruction. If we had concluded Trump didn’t obstruct we would have said so. He should have been more precise and to the point. If he meant to say “We feel Trump obstructed but we can’t indict due to DOJ Policy” then he should have said just that. Maybe it’s the way they had to write it? I don’t know cop talk or lawyer talk.

Alan

In my opinion too much money was spent to come up with nothing.

So in your view, there should have been no investigation into all those contacts between russians and spankites, even though they all lied about those contacts? No investigation after King Spanky himself fired the FBI director in order to end the investigation? Ok. Whatevs, dude.

And as you probably know, the investigation turned a profit given the Spankist campaign manager's coughing up millions o of unpaid taxes and fines.

agip wrote:

Thisthreadisridiculous wrote:

In my opinion too much money was spent to come up with nothing.

So in your view, there should have been no investigation into all those contacts between russians and spankites, even though they all lied about those contacts? No investigation after King Spanky himself fired the FBI director in order to end the investigation? Ok. Whatevs, dude.

And as you probably know, the investigation turned a profit given the Spankist campaign manager's coughing up millions o of unpaid taxes and fines.

I mean... you do know that the Russian were openly trying to help King Spanky get elected, right? You do know that Spankers tried to get Russian intelligence to hand over stolen dirt on HRC, right? You do know that Trumpers lied to you when they said they didn't try to work with Russian intelligence to hand over stolen dirt on HRC, right? You do know that Trump lied to you when he said he had no business deals in russia, right?

You know all this but you think there should have been no investigation. Ok. I'll just call you traitorous. Working with a hostile nation against the best interests of the United States of America.

L L wrote:

Anyone notice rising gas prices?

Trump's fault.

Because he didn't want Obama to get credit for the Iran deal, he tore it up and put in sanctions.

The ban to purchase Iranian oil went into effect today.

The lead up to the ban caused oil and gas prices to rise.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-sanctions-decision/the-debate-behind-trumps-move-to-tighten-iran-oil-sanctions-idUSKCN1S735N?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FtopNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Top+News%29

That offsets any tax cuts that the middle class may have received.

But helps people invested in Saudi oil.

Iran sanctions didn't help but most of the supply is being artificially controlled by Russia and OPEC who have always done this because their economy depends on oil. Prices will go back down because US fracking companies can run at full output now that oil is at 65-70 a barrel.

OK.

Now from a political side does it make sense for Trump to issue sanctions on Iran after the US had an agreement with Iran and Iran was compliant with the agreement?

We said, you do this and we'll do that.

They did this and we refused to do that.

And what is the end game here since Iran is already compliant on the nuclear side?

Democrats lose again!!!!!!

L L wrote:

Anyone notice rising gas prices?

Trump's fault.

Because he didn't want Obama to get credit for the Iran deal, he tore it up and put in sanctions.

The ban to purchase Iranian oil went into effect today.

The lead up to the ban caused oil and gas prices to rise.

But helps people invested in Saudi oil.

Yup. It also helps the oil companies which rake in more profit as a result of the "higher" prices. Limit supply. Increase price. The same thing the African diamond firms have done for decades.

Reedeer of thangs wrote:

agip wrote:

It burns...IT BURNS

https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1123381852948041730

Perhaps you should read the actual articles on this instead of getting your news from Twitter (remember the Russians are out there). You may learn something.

Comprehension is not a skill you posses. Now where in that tweet is there anything about Russia. That is a fabrication of your own.

p.n. wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Except we know that Trump did NOT get straight A's or even all A's . . . .

Okay, I'm genuinely confused. What's the difference between "straight A's" and "all A's"? I've always understood those as synonyms.

They both include the dreaded A-.

L L wrote:

OK.

Now from a political side does it make sense for Trump to issue sanctions on Iran after the US had an agreement with Iran and Iran was compliant with the agreement?

We said, you do this and we'll do that.

They did this and we refused to do that.

And what is the end game here since Iran is already compliant on the nuclear side?

First, the country is filled with scary mooselimbs.

Second, the country has a lot of oil they are willing to sell at lower prices.

Third, Saudi Arabia gets to raise prices.

L L wrote:

OK.

Now from a political side does it make sense for Trump to issue sanctions on Iran after the US had an agreement with Iran and Iran was compliant with the agreement?

We said, you do this and we'll do that.

They did this and we refused to do that.

And what is the end game here since Iran is already compliant on the nuclear side?

The Iran deal was thrown out because it was Obama's deal. Everyone already knows the president has the mental and emotional range of a 5 year old.

At this point I don't know why Republicans won't just launch a war with Iran. Oh, that's right, because if they actually solved any of the made up problems in their retarded platform then they wouldn't be able to screech and writhe about them to the general public.

Good example of why meaningful pro-life legislation will never get passed. It's way more useful politically as a perpetual dangling carrot in front of single issue voters.

L L wrote:

OK.

Now from a political side does it make sense for Trump to issue sanctions on Iran after the US had an agreement with Iran and Iran was compliant with the agreement?

We said, you do this and we'll do that.

They did this and we refused to do that.

And what is the end game here since Iran is already compliant on the nuclear side?

It is all about helping poor Saudi Arabia out.

Trump, August 2015.

FYI: He registered several new companies based in Saudi that month, including THC Jeddah Hotel.

FYI 2: During his presidential campaign Trump called out HRC for accepting money from Saudi Arabia for the Clinton Foundation.

"They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much."

"I would want to protect Saudi Arabia. But Saudi Arabia is going to have to help us economically. They were making, before the oil went down ... they were making $1 billion a day."