Deranged Rhino Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, The_Dude said: I believe Trump is guilty of laundering money. I believe he’s committed “book keeping” felonies. And for the reasons you listed, I don’t care. The “Russia” investigation has NOTHING to do with the election. It was just the witch hunts excuse to pry into Trump’s book keeping. And I’m furious because it’s obvious that the DOJ is a 5th column of the DNC. And you know me, I mock “conspiracies.” But this is transparent bull####. I want an investigation into how the DOJ conducts and prioritizes it’s investigations. I would offer two things to consider: 1) If they had a prosecutable money laundering case on 45, from any point of his life, they would have hit him with it already. There's a chance Mueller will discover something along those lines, but if he had found something it would have been more evident in the indictments/filings to date. Working in the world of construction/building in NYC makes it easy to imagine that Trump would have had to have been dirty in some way, just in order to survive - but I'm not certain that's the reality. My (limited) experience in construction tended to show me that the bigger general contractors were cleaner than their reps, and had to be due to the legal/public spotlight they operate under on multi million dollar builds. I really don't know for sure one way or the other, but your overall point about it being unrelated to the election is 100% correct. 2) While I know you hate conspiracies, I don't think it is one to suggest that the DOJ isn't a 5th column for the DNC, but rather the uniparty. In the past it has served both sides of the aisle - so long as the institutions themselves (including the uniparty) were protected and insulated. 4 minutes ago, Koko78 said: The Federal Reserve?
The_Dude Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: I would offer two things to consider: 1) If they had a prosecutable money laundering case on 45, from any point of his life, they would have hit him with it already. There's a chance Mueller will discover something along those lines, but if he had found something it would have been more evident in the indictments/filings to date. Working in the world of construction/building in NYC makes it easy to imagine that Trump would have had to have been dirty in some way, just in order to survive - but I'm not certain that's the reality. My (limited) experience in construction tended to show me that the bigger general contractors were cleaner than their reps, and had to be due to the legal/public spotlight they operate under on multi million dollar builds. I really don't know for sure one way or the other, but your overall point about it being unrelated to the election is 100% correct. 2) While I know you hate conspiracies, I don't think it is one to suggest that the DOJ isn't a 5th column for the DNC, but rather the uniparty. In the past it has served both sides of the aisle - so long as the institutions themselves (including the uniparty) were protected and insulated. There is a silver lining. Lots of idiot liberals believe they didn’t lose the election because of their message. So they’re ramping up their leftward extremism and it’s gonna burn them good.
Foxx Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 2 hours ago, Tiberius said: Post them then! The exact words, please don't make me regret doing the leg work, Tibs. there is the 'insurance policy'. i will continue to read when i have time. 1
Foxx Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) @Tiberius pau·ci·ty /ˈpôsədē/ noun the presence of something only in small or insufficient quantities or amounts; scarcity. "a paucity of information" synonyms: scarcity, sparseness, sparsity, dearth, shortage, rarity, rareness, poverty, insufficiency, deficiency, inadequacy, famine, lack, want, meagerness, limitedness, scantiness, skimpiness, paltriness, restrictedness, deficit, shortfall; rareexiguity "a paucity of evidence" Edited March 13, 2019 by Foxx
DC Tom Posted March 13, 2019 Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Foxx said: @Tiberius But to be clear, at a minimum... Quote As I sort of explained, if he is not going to be President, then we don't need to burn longstanding sources and risk sort of the lost of future investigative outlets... They unquestionably let politics influence the course and scope of the investigation. Edited March 14, 2019 by DC Tom 2
Taro T Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 2 hours ago, DC Tom said: But to be clear, at a minimum... They unquestionably let politics influence the course and scope of the investigation. Small typo in your quote, she said "if he is NOT going to be President ..." Normal people would realize it was a typo; Gator will use it as proof there was no insurance policy.
DC Tom Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 Just now, Taro T said: Small typo in your quote, she said "if he is NOT going to be President ..." Normal people would realize it was a typo; Gator will use it as proof there was no insurance policy. Fixed, thanks. 1
row_33 Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 (edited) What will happen first, the Mueller Report release or the Bills winning a Super Bowl? Edited March 14, 2019 by row_33 1
Uncle Joe Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 22 minutes ago, row_33 said: What will happen first, the Mueller Report release or the Bills winning a Super Bowl? That's a brain freeze right there. 1
Deranged Rhino Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/confirmed-mueller-seeking-subpoena-contempt-citation-against-foreign-corporation (money's still on this being Orbis)
BeginnersMind Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 10 hours ago, DC Tom said: But to be clear, at a minimum... They unquestionably let politics influence the course and scope of the investigation. The way I read that, and forgive me if this is your point, she’s saying that they have little evidence at that point (paucity) and don’t believe he will win, so based on those two things, they are not burning sources and using all tools to go after him. The “politics” is in the text where her human (not conspiratorial coup!) bias is that she compares a deeper investigation in the future with an insurance policy. That’s her personal politics and has been on display in her many loverboy texts. But no government worker is an automaton without biases against “the man,” whoever the man may be in any given election or appointment cycle. There was undisputed evidence that Russia was working to divide the electorate and Trump was the large beneficiary. Even Trump admits to Russian tampering (some days). They investigated. Good. No collusion with Trump (we assume). Very, very good. The rest is so much made up horsehockey by both sides.
Tiberius Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 12 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Ok, now it's now officially a lie if Trump is tweeting about it
4merper4mer Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 2 hours ago, BeginnersMind said: The way I read that, and forgive me if this is your point, she’s saying that they have little evidence at that point (paucity) and don’t believe he will win, so based on those two things, they are not burning sources and using all tools to go after him. The “politics” is in the text where her human (not conspiratorial coup!) bias is that she compares a deeper investigation in the future with an insurance policy. That’s her personal politics and has been on display in her many loverboy texts. But no government worker is an automaton without biases against “the man,” whoever the man may be in any given election or appointment cycle. There was undisputed evidence that Russia was working to divide the electorate and Trump was the large beneficiary. Even Trump admits to Russian tampering (some days). They investigated. Good. No collusion with Trump (we assume). Very, very good. The rest is so much made up horsehockey by both sides. Shirley
BeginnersMind Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 11 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: Shirley So you think there's collusion or a coup? Which one of these so-exciting narratives is your make-believe?
GG Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 9 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: So you think there's collusion or a coup? Which one of these so-exciting narratives is your make-believe? What does the available data support?
LB3 Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 9 minutes ago, GG said: What does the available data support? The data overwhelmingly supports the position that BM is a disingenuous asshat. 1
Recommended Posts