Jump to content

The former President is stone cold stupid. Just listen to him.


'Nator

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In a bizarre interview with Fox News last night, President Trump stood next to a sculpture in the Oval Office that he said depicts former president Teddy Roosevelt, and explained that statues are vita

Biden misspeaks, trips and says some stupid stuff sometimes.   Trump is a complete fucking moron and embarrasses himself routinely.    If you don't see the difference you're either

Posted Images

8 minutes ago, El Guapo said:

Really? I guess all the social media conservative bans, censoring covid dissenters, all at the behest of Democrat government agencies never happened? Or DOJ launching investigations at parents arguing against school teachings is not aimed at stifling dissent?  


Social media isn’t federal law or legislation .    Try again.  
 

I have no idea what you’re talking about with investigations of citizens who disagree with educational curriculums….but for the sake of argument, let’s assume it’s true.  Has anyone been arrested, incarcerated, or indicted for voicing dissent or a different viewpoint?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nine said:


Social media isn’t federal law or legislation .    Try again.  
 

I have no idea what you’re talking about with investigations of citizens who disagree with educational curriculums….but for the sake of argument, let’s assume it’s true.  Has anyone been arrested, incarcerated, or indicted for voicing dissent or a different viewpoint?

 

The DOJ asked for help about the nuts going to school board meetings and threatening "violence"   

 

El Guapo obviously wants to frame it that those parents were being investigated for simply arguing against the school policies. Totally false 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, OILERMAN said:

 

The DOJ asked for help about the nuts going to school board meetings and threatening "violence"   

 

El Guapo obviously wants to frame it that those parents were being investigated for simply arguing against the school policies. Totally false 


I recall numerous articles about school officials and board members being personally threatened and even physically attacked by parents…but it wasn’t so much over curriculum as much as it was the school board’s  masking policies during the pandemic.  
 

EG, you’re saying you’re okay with this?    You’re an outspoken opponent of masks….you feel these parents have the right  to threaten violence and attack people because they disagree with the masking policy?   You’re saying it’s wrong to encourage local authorities to investigate such incidents and acts of violence? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, El Guapo said:

Really? You mean charges brought about by Biden appointees while the same appointees torpedoed and refuse to pursue investigations into Biden or his family? Classified documents at home? Like Joe? Who else? Probably every President ever. And Hillary? She had emails that were classified hacked by Russians and who knows who else. She willfully refused security to keep her own files in her fucking basement.

 

 

Why would they investigate Biden? Your side fabricates things to rail against while turning a blind eye to actual crimes because you want to claim it is politicized. Meanwhile in reality your side glorifies a legit, proven criminal as your messiah. You are all fucking hypocrites and don't give a damn about this country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, yes it's so politically based that no other President (Republican or Democrat) has ever been indicted for this type of crime.  It's self inflicted too as has been previously mentioned ; all dumbass had to do was hand over the documents as they asked.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

EG also forgot to indignantly draw parallels between the Trump indictment and the Bill Clinton "sock drawer" recordings, in which a federal judge ruled the NARA lacks jurisdiction to reclassify and/or reclaim documents after a President has left office.     Republicans love to cite this ruling as if it somehow established a precedent for the current Trump situation....but the situations are absolutely nothing alike.

 

The part they choose to conveniently overlook is that the Clinton "sock drawer" case was about recorded interviews that were the personal property of a former POTUS.... NOT actively classified military documents.   

 

The judge's ruling in the case was a direct response to a conservative group's lawsuit to have Clinton's personal property re-classified as presidential records, thus making them accessible via the FOIA.   But at the time, Clinton had already been out of office for 10+ years......and the judge ruled the law provided no mechanism for NARA to go back and change classifications once a President has left office.

 

If anything, the Sock Drawer case is almost the exact OPPOSITE of the Trump case.     Clinton took his own personal property...not classified documents.    Trump removed classified documents....and when he got caught, tried to claim they were his personal property.     

 

And the funny part is....even THAT was a complete lie on Trump's part.   He knew for a fact that the documents were never declassified..... but he still lied through his teeth and told the country he did.    Because otherwise he'd be forced to admit he screwed up and did something wrong....which would sound an awful lot like accountability.    Which is something Trump's brain isn't even capable of processing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nine said:

EG also forgot to indignantly draw parallels between the Trump indictment and the Bill Clinton "sock drawer" recordings, in which a federal judge ruled the NARA lacks jurisdiction to reclassify and/or reclaim documents after a President has left office.     Republicans love to cite this ruling as if it somehow established a precedent for the current Trump situation....but the situations are absolutely nothing alike.

The clear parallel is that Trump was apparently keeping his golf socks mixed into those boxes full of top secret documents…

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

This can't be stated enough. It's hilarious. Yeah, the evidence for his indictment is partisan...95% Republican!

And the retards who support Trump can't figure this out.  A couple of the prosecutors are Democrats but all their evidence is coming from republicans.  Yet they conclude Trump is being treated unfairly and it's all political.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ctm said:

 It's almost exclusively republicans and/or people Trump hired who are providing the real evidence against him.  


Well, yeah.   It’s no secret  that Trump  insists on surrounding himself with yes-men to do his bidding….a policy that effectively excludes any and all Democrats.  

 

So pretty much any evidence Jack Smith has on Trump would have either come from  Trump’s inner circle of Republican lackeys…or directly from Trump himself, who is the gift that keeps on giving for the prosecution.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...