Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

The original poster of this thread was right, the whiny liberals. They lie and pander to minorities yet play the "all for the people" card, just to get elected. Those who vote for them are braindead followers. Suckers are born every minute. Evil lying Hillary Clinton lost because of it, karma is a b*tch.

I think the big surprise this campaign cycle will be the lack of surprises. Biden will continue to lead the race and win the nomination, trump's approval rating will remain in the cellar, and Biden will win by recapturing MI WI PA.

Just looking at how the polls and betting odds move...not much seems to change.

People seem to have made up their minds - they loathe trump and long for the calm normalcy of Obama again. Biden is that path.

Although I suppose the next step will be when candidates start dropping out - that will rejigger support as voters lose their candidate and choose a new candidate.

Another twist will be the Warren/Bernie people. They are the same ideologically....and they have split the lefty vote between them. if one drops out then the other would logically jump up to near biden status. But I don't see either dropping out for a long time.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Biden will be the nominee as America continues its love affair with septuagenarians.

The angry black woman vibe doesn't work with a lot of voters.

Obama is still a beloved figure and the candidates do them no good by attacking his/Biden's policies.

The fact that Biden should have ran but didn't in 2016 plays a factor here.

Alan

Sure dude, this is who YOU wanted to have in Office?

Watch and learn just how honest he is.

You'll need to watch it twice old man, hence 2 links. Biden will NOT get my vote, no chance. Do some research with the blinders off.

Totally BS post. A 2nd grader is more up on things than this poster.

538 has it at 42%. The lowest of any president at this point other than Carter. And it hasn't risen or fallen - that's my point. It just stays in the cellar - everyone has made up his or her mind already. Nothing new matters.

The democrat “debates” are hilarious!!!!

Pandering to mexicans, muslims and gays.

Good luck in Winn in the Midwest!!!!

Hahahahahaha!!!!!

Democrats lose again!!!!

Pookie Washington wrote:

adhj wrote:

Those were totally bs and distorted claims. I made them up. But here's some stuff on Hillary, whom I wanted to win so I voted for a known liar. She lost, but us liberals have to admit, we knew she was awful and we voted for her.

https://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/statements/byruling/false/https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/09/hillary-new-lies-lies-lies-list-grows-longer/

And flagpole claims she was the most qualified Democratic candidate. I voted for another candidate who was more qualified but he didn't win. Lesson learned, never listen to flagpole.

THIS^^^^^

I am astounded that any one in his or her right mind would EVER listen to Flagpole. His track record the last few years is like 0-115. He is winless with more wrong predictions than a centipede could count on his or her legs.

Fat hurts wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Mueller would never say that Trump was innocent of conspiracy. Our judicial system does not work that way. You have a presumption of innocence. Trump is innocent already. He has no duty to prove his innocence. The judicial system can indict him of a crime and attempt to prove his guilt. But Trump is PRESUMED INNOCENT. Enough with this nonsense of him having to prove his innocence. HE IS INNOCENT unless proved otherwise.

Again, there is a big difference between INNOCENT and PRESUMED INNOCENT.

Tiny is guilty. That is obvious from the evidence in the Mueller report. It just hasn't been proven in a court of law.

How can he be guilty based on the Mueller report when the AUTHOR of the said report said they never reached a determination of guilt. He had access to ALL the evidence but Fat Hurts - sitting on the outside and not privy to all the evidence - can say that Trump was guilty when the one running the investigation said he never found Trump guilty.

Sally Vix wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Again, there is a big difference between INNOCENT and PRESUMED INNOCENT.

Tiny is guilty. That is obvious from the evidence in the Mueller report. It just hasn't been proven in a court of law.

How can he be guilty based on the Mueller report when the AUTHOR of the said report said they never reached a determination of guilt. He had access to ALL the evidence but Fat Hurts - sitting on the outside and not privy to all the evidence - can say that Trump was guilty when the one running the investigation said he never found Trump guilty.

I know republicans would rather depend on ideology than experts, but experts feel trump was guilty.

"“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report," the former federal prosecutors said in a statement."

agip wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

How can he be guilty based on the Mueller report when the AUTHOR of the said report said they never reached a determination of guilt. He had access to ALL the evidence but Fat Hurts - sitting on the outside and not privy to all the evidence - can say that Trump was guilty when the one running the investigation said he never found Trump guilty.

I know republicans would rather depend on ideology than experts, but experts feel trump was guilty.

"“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report," the former federal prosecutors said in a statement."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hundreds-former-prosecutors-say-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

agip wrote:

agip wrote:

I know republicans would rather depend on ideology than experts, but experts feel trump was guilty.

"“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report," the former federal prosecutors said in a statement."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hundreds-former-prosecutors-say-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

Mueller explicitly stated that the OLC opinion was NOT the reason they did not indict for obstruction. He also explicitly stated that he was not fired, or obstructed in any way from completing his investigation.

Why are you continuing to push this false narrative?

This is made even more ridiculous when you consider the fact that the investigation itself was based on false accusations against Trump.

You have nothing.

agip wrote:

agip wrote:

I know republicans would rather depend on ideology than experts, but experts feel trump was guilty.

"“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report," the former federal prosecutors said in a statement."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hundreds-former-prosecutors-say-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

When Bill Clinton was president 89% of the media was liberal/conservative and only 6% was conservative. Those former prosecutors - I am guessing - just like ALL of the investigators on Mueller's team were former Hillary donors - are liberals and/or Dems who despise Trump.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

When Bill Clinton was president 89% of the media was liberal/conservative and only 6% was conservative. Those former prosecutors - I am guessing - just like ALL of the investigators on Mueller's team were former Hillary donors - are liberals and/or Dems who despise Trump.

Oh, the dumba$$ prick has an opinion, once again based on ignorance. Shocking.

Sally Vix wrote:

Those former prosecutors - I am guessing - just like ALL of the investigators on Mueller's team were former Hillary donors - are liberals and/or Dems who despise Trump.

The list is a matter of public record and it shows your assumption is wrong.

Runningart2004 wrote:

The angry black woman vibe doesn't work with a lot of voters.

Alan

RACIST!!!

Biden Sucks and LIES wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Biden will be the nominee as America continues its love affair with septuagenarians.

The angry black woman vibe doesn't work with a lot of voters.

Obama is still a beloved figure and the candidates do them no good by attacking his/Biden's policies.

The fact that Biden should have ran but didn't in 2016 plays a factor here.

Alan

Sure dude, this is who YOU wanted to have in Office?

Watch and learn just how honest he is.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-and-harris-revive-dispute-on-busing-and-criminal-justice-023902485.htmlhttps://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-and-harris-revive-dispute-on-busing-and-criminal-justice-023902485.html

You'll need to watch it twice old man, hence 2 links. Biden will NOT get my vote, no chance. Do some research with the blinders off.

Don’t worry trumpkin, we weren’t relying on your vote

agip wrote:

agip wrote:

I know republicans would rather depend on ideology than experts, but experts feel trump was guilty.

"“We believe strongly that, but for the OLC memo, the overwhelming weight of professional judgment would come down in favor of prosecution for the conduct outlined in the Mueller Report," the former federal prosecutors said in a statement."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hundreds-former-prosecutors-say-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

Let it go, agip. Mueller submitted his report and then testified. It's over. You are coming off as a whiny sore loser with TDS.

Good luck with your clown dem candidates, none will defeat Trump.

KAG2020

Big reality check wrote:

agip wrote:

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

Mueller explicitly stated that the OLC opinion was NOT the reason they did not indict for obstruction. He also explicitly stated that he was not fired, or obstructed in any way from completing his investigation.

Why are you continuing to push this false narrative?

This is made even more ridiculous when you consider the fact that the investigation itself was based on false accusations against Trump.

You have nothing.

+1. The Fisa warrant was based on lies. Hillary was actually trying to get dirt on opponents but Dems insist that Trump was the one when he never dealt with the Russians. If the media had any integrity they would be reporting on this but instead they play along with this false and criminally negligent narrative.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

I should say experts feel Trump's actions were worthy of prosecution. A trial would determine if he was guilty or not guilty.

When Bill Clinton was president 89% of the media was liberal/conservative and only 6% was conservative. Those former prosecutors - I am guessing - just like ALL of the investigators on Mueller's team were former Hillary donors - are liberals and/or Dems who despise Trump.

JFC. The dumb. The dumb. The stupid. Sally, google. FFS. False. What you are saying is false.

g'damnit. You pretend to be fair but you spout lies. easily disproven lies.

Spankist. You are a spankist. Stop saying you don't like trump. You act like him, you vote like him, you lie like him.

This isn't hard sally.

"More than 450 former federal prosecutors who worked in Republican and Democratic administrations have signed on to a statement asserting special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s findings would have produced obstruction charges against President Trump — if not for the office he holds.

The statement — signed by myriad former career government employees as well as high-profile political appointees — offers a rebuttal to Attorney General William P. Barr’s determination that the evidence Mueller uncovered was “not sufficient” to establish that Trump committed a crime."