You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
CSS 2.0 wrote:Are we just going to ignore the comments made by Cohen’s lawyer?
Or maybe he’s simply chatting shit. It’s a political witch hunt, after all.
They are going to ignore it CSS.
And thank you for joining conversation...you’re a rare dry spell in a sea of commenters who would kill their grandmothers so long as the economy is humming.
True. You have certain people here still bringing up Clinton even though she is not even relevant to the conversation at ALL. It's the usual Republican deflection tactic.
Yeah, they'll ignore that multiple HIGH RANKING officials in THIS ADMIN have been indicted or pled guilty to charges. This is literally the most corrupt admin and this only after less than 2 years. Oh and I'd say it's pretty significant if one candidate paid off people to avoid bad stories (ie affairs) from being released just prior to the election in 2016.
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:I think you’re right. I don’t think most people will think paying off a whore who wants to talk about a consensual relationship is a high crime and misdemeanor.
And quite frankly this is it. The conspiracy nuts still think Russia, but they’re becoming less and less common. Mueller was tasked with investigating Russia’s influence on the election, and all they’ve got is financial fraud unrelated to the election from Manafort, and now Cohen’s plea to reduce charges to his own questionable financial behavior separate from the campaign.
I definitely understand why Trump won’t talk to Mueller. I personally find this farcical, in that Clinton’s team was granted immunity to admit they intentionally mishandled classified information, but we're supposed to pretend Trump paying off whores looking for fame because they spread their legs is the worst crime of the century.
A year in and this is what Mueller has? Nothing related to Russia and the election? If you were against Clinton being impeached for perjury, you have to be opposed to Trump - if you’re claiming not to be a partisan hack.
But the Democrats have to impeach. Pelosi will have to take the charge if she hopes to get the speakership in January. I fully expect this to be identical to Clinton. A partisan house brings articles of impeachment, and a partisan senate tells them to fuck off.
I don’t think a platform of “Trump paid a woman off not to talk about fucking him” is a winning argument for democrats.
You do know that there is another trial for Maniford right? That deals with all of the shit? You do know that right? I’m starting to think that you don’t know that. I’m starting to think that you were not informed.
And I realize you don’t know what Manafort’s second trial is about. Let me guess, you think it’s about Russia. And are unaware it’s entireky about his time working as a consultant for the President of Ukraine, who fled after Russia took Crimea. So not only is it not about Russia or the election, it’s about helping a foreign leader who was “deposed” by Russia.
It’s actually about ethics and integrity...something i know you don’t care about.
What if alll of those completely legal positions compromised his ability to serve this country?
Nah...you don’t want to hear about that. Still waiting on all that consistency you pride yourself on.
Just exactly when does the law matter? And when does it not?
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
On a side note, I'm glad to see fresh faces participating in the discussions.
Re: US Politics Thread
Re: US Politics Thread
As a foregin viewer and big(ly) fan, I've gotta say that this whole thing (from when he announced his candidacy until now) has been some of the most compelling television that the United States has ever produced. And the US makes a lot of good shit.
Lots of twists, turns. Some light comedy and long running plot threads like the pee tape make this show compulsive viewing. 10/10 would repeat binge on Netflix.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
I think it's fair to say that if you supported or were silent with Daniel Manning's commuted sentence, an actual traitor, who it is very likely lead to deaths of Americans and allies, you pretty much need to sit any pardon debates out.
You mean Bradley/Chelsea Manning?
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
I think it's fair to say that if you supported or were silent with Daniel Manning's commuted sentence, an actual traitor, who it is very likely lead to deaths of Americans and allies, you pretty much need to sit any pardon debates out.
Great point.
