ADVERTISEMENT

Michael Avenatti

orangelvis said:
Let me ask another question. Do you believe that since DonJr and others went to a meeting thinking that they were going to receive dirt on Hillary, that in and of itself is a crime? If so, what do you call it when Hillary's campaign and DNC pays a law firm, who then pays Fusion GPS, who then hires Michael Steele, who then buys information from Russians to create a dossier of disinformation, or dirt on Trump? You do know that this is all true, right?
Click to expand...

A few points:

1) Inadvertently receiving information from an illegal source is different than doing it deliberately. Buying something from a pawn shop that was stolen is not the same as having the thief be like "hey do you want this?" and you saying "if it's what you say I love it."
2) There's a difference between uncorroborated and proven false. My understanding is that parts of the dossier have been verified and other parts have not been verified.
3) Whataboutism much?
 
orangelvis said:
You seem to put a lot of stock in Mueller's investigation. My original question was, what started all of this that eventually led to Mueller's appointment. If the dossier is trash and if Papadopoulos and Carter Page are innocent, or were set up by FBI/CIA operatives, what is the basis for any of this?
At this point, if we get there, and I firmly believe we will get there, the only thing left to believe is that there was/is a concerted scheme to force Trump out. If there was/is a plan to do so, what does that say about the players involved. Has the US become a third world country where power brokers and cabals control elections and outcomes?
Click to expand...

The dossier was not the sole piece of evidence in getting those warrants, the dossier has not been proven to be trash, and criminals get set up all the time.
 
orangelvis said:
Let me ask another question. Do you believe that since DonJr and others went to a meeting thinking that they were going to receive dirt on Hillary, that in and of itself is a crime? If so, what do you call it when Hillary's campaign and DNC pays a law firm, who then pays Fusion GPS, who then hires Michael Steele, who then buys information from Russians to create a dossier of disinformation, or dirt on Trump? You do know that this is all true, right?
Click to expand...

To answer your first question, no I don't. As an example if my friends and I decided to meet up with a guy to buy/get some drugs. But we didn't buy any. No crime. If we bought the drugs, yes crime. For your 2nd one, If Hillary did that and was aware that the information that she got was coming from the Russians, then she is absolutely guilty of the same crime and needs to be charged for it.
 
orangelvis said:
You seem to put a lot of stock in Mueller's investigation. My original question was, what started all of this that eventually led to Mueller's appointment. If the dossier is trash and if Papadopoulos and Carter Page are innocent, or were set up by FBI/CIA operatives, what is the basis for any of this?
At this point, if we get there, and I firmly believe we will get there, the only thing left to believe is that there was/is a concerted scheme to force Trump out. If there was/is a plan to do so, what does that say about the players involved. Has the US become a third world country where power brokers and cabals control elections and outcomes?
Click to expand...

I know this wasn't aimed at me, but I'll swing at it. I honestly don't care about the dossier or Trumps background with the Russians. If everything the Libtards are saying is true and that Trump sold his soul to Putin for cash and now every Russian hooker gets to pee in Trump's bed, it doesn't matter to me in the slightest. I already don't like Trump and wouldn't vote for him. None of the things said about him in the dossier are illegal that I know of, so I consider them pointless.

This is all about breaking the law and the only thing I see that Trump has done that may be illegal is the meetings his staff (and possibly Trump himself) had with the Russians, for the express purpose of getting dirt on Hillary. Just as I felt that Bill Clinton could bang all the interns he wanted to on the desk in the Oval Office... distastefull yes, illegal no. BUT when he lied about it under oath, he broke the law. He should have been thrown out of office for it. Same thing here.
 
Well, @hopefultiger13 and @FLaw47, I appreciate the input. I am glad you were able to express your views without getting nasty about it. I am interested to see/hear the other side of things.
I''ll try to tell you what I think has happened and will be proven.
I think the FBI and DOJ actively and illegally worked to keep Hillary from being indicted during the campaign. They did this under the assumption that there was no way Hillary would lose the election. From the Strzok-Page texts, we know that there was an "insurance plan" in place in case Trump happened to pull it out. Once Trump did win, the "insurance plan", (which is unfolding now in the news), is that the CIA/FBI had planted moles to entrap Carter Page, Papadopoulos, probably Manafort and others. They used this info, plus the dossier to obtain FISA warants on 3 occasions. They never told the FISA judge about the moles, nor did they tell the judge that the dossier was bought and paid for by Clinton. We know from McCabe's sworn testimony, that without the dossier, they did not have enough to obtain a FISA warrant. One of you mentioned above that law enforcement entraps crooks all of the time. This is not the same. This will prove to be 100x worse than WaterGate. This will be proven to be the biggest abuse of power in US history. People involved should and will go to jail. Many in the MSM will be shown to complicit as well by printing/talking about unverified information that was leaked by the FBI, CIA or DOJ. Remember, Clapper sent Comey to meet Trump before the inauguration to advise him of the claims made by the dossier. Comey didn't tell Trump it was opposition research. The next day, Clapper gives the dossier info to Jake Tapper at CNN and tells him the Pres elect is under investigation. This is the truth. A narrative begins.
I have one other question no one seems have an answer for: In what universe would Putin rather have Trump as president; rather than Hillary? If anyone in Russia had any of this dossier info on Trump, don't you think they would have released it by now; after everything Trump has done to Russia thus far?
 
orangelvis said:
Well, @hopefultiger13 and @FLaw47, I appreciate the input. I am glad you were able to express your views without getting nasty about it. I am interested to see/hear the other side of things.
I''ll try to tell you what I think has happened and will be proven.
I think the FBI and DOJ actively and illegally worked to keep Hillary from being indicted during the campaign. They did this under the assumption that there was no way Hillary would lose the election. From the Strzok-Page texts, we know that there was an "insurance plan" in place in case Trump happened to pull it out. Once Trump did win, the "insurance plan", (which is unfolding now in the news), is that the CIA/FBI had planted moles to entrap Carter Page, Papadopoulos, probably Manafort and others. They used this info, plus the dossier to obtain FISA warants on 3 occasions. They never told the FISA judge about the moles, nor did they tell the judge that the dossier was bought and paid for by Clinton. We know from McCabe's sworn testimony, that without the dossier, they did not have enough to obtain a FISA warrant. One of you mentioned above that law enforcement entraps crooks all of the time. This is not the same. This will prove to be 100x worse than WaterGate. This will be proven to be the biggest abuse of power in US history. People involved should and will go to jail. Many in the MSM will be shown to complicit as well by printing/talking about unverified information that was leaked by the FBI, CIA or DOJ. Remember, Clapper sent Comey to meet Trump before the inauguration to advise him of the claims made by the dossier. Comey didn't tell Trump it was opposition research. The next day, Clapper gives the dossier info to Jake Tapper at CNN and tells him the Pres elect is under investigation. This is the truth. A narrative begins.
I have one other question no one seems have an answer for: In what universe would Putin rather have Trump as president; rather than Hillary? If anyone in Russia had any of this dossier info on Trump, don't you think they would have released it by now; after everything Trump has done to Russia thus far?
Click to expand...

I'm all about civil discourse @orangelvis.

Here's what I think is going on. I don't think that the FBI or the DOJ had any interest in inditing any candidate for President. Comey says he had no interest in swaying the election either way (and I believe him), although he failed miserably at that for sure. Inditing a candidate would essentially remove that candidate from consideration by the American people. I would imagine that the DOJ and FBI would go FAR out of their way to avoid this. I fail to believe without iron clad proof that the higher ups at the DOJ and FBI (not one or two people... that I could get my head around... but multiple people that have spent their entire careers at agencies devoted to justice all of a sudden forming some kind of vast conspiracy...no) would actively work for or against a candidate. And for what? To get HILLARY elected? One of the most disliked people in America? What FBI agent or Prosecutor would even LIKE Hillary, much less risk their jobs and prison time for her?

Again, I think the answer is much simpler than this. Sure there are plenty of underhanded dealings on both sides going on in Washington... there always are. And there's plenty of mud to fling on both sides. But a much simpler answer is that Trump and company worked with the Russians illegally. Then Trump and company try and cover it up by discrediting anyone and everyone who might want to prosecute him for it. Add in a moderate amount of government incompetence and here we are. I find that much more believable than what would be (by your own admission) the biggest abuse of power in US history.

Dude, in what world would make think Putin wanted Hillary in office? Obama put the sanctions on Russia first and there was no way Hillary was going to lift them. Putin offers dirt on Hillary and Trump agrees to lift sanctions. Simple, no? Don't even add in the fact that Trump likes and admires Putin and publicly avoids calling out Russia, whenever he possibly can. Now that's Trump personally, not the Republican party. There's a reason the approval of sanctions against Russia has made it through congress easily. Hell, even after all our intelligence agencies say that Russia was meddling in our elections, Trump still publicly said he believed Putin didn't do it. The sanctions we've applied to Russia are possibly the ONLY case of Trump bowing to political pressure (from his own party). If he'd failed to do anything, half the Republicans congress and half his staff would have turned on him.
 
hopefultiger13 said:
I'm all about civil discourse @orangelvis.

Here's what I think is going on. I don't think that the FBI or the DOJ had any interest in inditing any candidate for President. Comey says he had no interest in swaying the election either way (and I believe him), although he failed miserably at that for sure. Inditing a candidate would essentially remove that candidate from consideration by the American people. I would imagine that the DOJ and FBI would go FAR out of their way to avoid this. I fail to believe without iron clad proof that the higher ups at the DOJ and FBI (not one or two people... that I could get my head around... but multiple people that have spent their entire careers at agencies devoted to justice all of a sudden forming some kind of vast conspiracy...no) would actively work for or against a candidate. And for what? To get HILLARY elected? One of the most disliked people in America? What FBI agent or Prosecutor would even LIKE Hillary, much less risk their jobs and prison time for her?

Again, I think the answer is much simpler than this. Sure there are plenty of underhanded dealings on both sides going on in Washington... there always are. And there's plenty of mud to fling on both sides. But a much simpler answer is that Trump and company worked with the Russians illegally. Then Trump and company try and cover it up by discrediting anyone and everyone who might want to prosecute him for it. Add in a moderate amount of government incompetence and here we are. I find that much more believable than what would be (by your own admission) the biggest abuse of power in US history.

Dude, in what world would make think Putin wanted Hillary in office? Obama put the sanctions on Russia first and there was no way Hillary was going to lift them. Putin offers dirt on Hillary and Trump agrees to lift sanctions. Simple, no? Don't even add in the fact that Trump likes and admires Putin and publicly avoids calling out Russia, whenever he possibly can. Now that's Trump personally, not the Republican party. There's a reason the approval of sanctions against Russia has made it through congress easily. Hell, even after all our intelligence agencies say that Russia was meddling in our elections, Trump still publicly said he believed Putin didn't do it. The sanctions we've applied to Russia are possibly the ONLY case of Trump bowing to political pressure (from his own party). If he'd failed to do anything, half the Republicans congress and half his staff would have turned on him.
Click to expand...

Trump knew that Russian collusion/interference was a ruse from the beginning. Obama laughed at Russian collusion 3 weeks before the election. It wasn't until Hillary lost that Russian interference was even a thing with Obama. Nunez warned about Russian meddling back in 2014. Yeah, Brennan and Clapper said it was their opinion that Russia meddled, but they couldn't give proof. Why? Because the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to check out the server. Why? Why was CrowdStrike hired to check out the server. Ever looked into CrowdStrike? I bet Horowitz and Huber are looking into it. Hell, Trump has killed Russians since taking office. Remember Hillary's Red Reset Button? Remember Obama getting picked up on a mike; unaware; as he's telling Medvedev: "Tell Vladimir I can be more flexible after my election". Funny after the election, the Clinton Foundation and Global Innitiative almost shut down. People quitting, people being let go. No donations coming in. Strange isn't it. No more .5 Million dollar, twenty minute speeches for Bill in Moscow. So weird?

The main thing you need to remember is this. Trump can declassify any or all of this stuff that Rosenstein is withholding any time he wants. Trump is a lot smarter than many give him credit for. He said he would drain the swamp. He's kept his promises so far. I think he's waiting for every lie, every cover-up, and everybody that was involved to expose themselves before he unclassifies the whole thing. I think that day is quickly approaching us all.
 
orangelvis said:
Listen to Dan Bongino's podcast #716. Here's the link. If you don't already have at least an inkling that this Mueller thing is shaky, then this will probably not make sense to you. The fact that the Federal Judge in the Manafort case is asking some serious questions, the fact that Rosenstein is defying Congress and not releasing documents; lying about redactions, etc, should, at least make reasonable people think closely about what is really going on here.

View embedded media
Click to expand...




Not the original judge that made those initial comments but still noteworthy.
 
orangelvis said:
He's got nothing on Manafort except for things going back 10-12 years.

Now, this is exciting.

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2017...-latest-clinton-russia-collusion-revelations/

...and

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/0...-in-a-re-impaneled-uranium-one-investigation/
Click to expand...

Lol. I don’t know what is more disturbing. That you link to Breitbart as a credible source of news, or that you link to a Breitbart article from last year and try to pass it off as today’s breaking news.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CUAngler
nytigerfan said:
Lol. I don’t know what is more disturbing. That you link to Breitbart as a credible source of news, or that you link to a Breitbart article from last year and try to pass it off as today’s breaking news.
Click to expand...

Ok. Try these. Some of you are going to be very, very disappointed when the truth of all of this comes to fruition. In fact, I fully expect Mueller will be indicted by Huber; before the mid-terms, for his role in the Uranium One, FBI cover up. lol. So, if you're disturbed now, well buckle up!


https://www.dailywire.com/news/30632/bombshell-muellers-fbi-worked-closely-russian-ryan-saavedra
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/20...ting-paul-manaforts-russian-business-partner/
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/t...emoved-and-his-partisan-hit-squad-dismantled/

http://www.newsweek.com/how-robert-mueller-connected-probe-hillary-clintons-uranium-one-deal-688548
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/t...emoved-and-his-partisan-hit-squad-dismantled/
 
orangelvis said:
Ok. Try these. Some of you are going to be very, very disappointed when the truth of all of this comes to fruition. In fact, I fully expect Mueller will be indicted by Huber; before the mid-terms, for his role in the Uranium One, FBI cover up. lol. So, if you're disturbed now, well buckle up!


https://www.dailywire.com/news/30632/bombshell-muellers-fbi-worked-closely-russian-ryan-saavedra
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/20...ting-paul-manaforts-russian-business-partner/
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/t...emoved-and-his-partisan-hit-squad-dismantled/

http://www.newsweek.com/how-robert-mueller-connected-probe-hillary-clintons-uranium-one-deal-688548
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/t...emoved-and-his-partisan-hit-squad-dismantled/
Click to expand...

not concerned in the least about any of what you said coming true. I am concerned about what you continue to share as "news". You need to leave your right wing propaganda echo chamber, and fast.
 
orangelvis said:
Ok. Try these. Some of you are going to be very, very disappointed when the truth of all of this comes to fruition. In fact, I fully expect Mueller will be indicted by Huber; before the mid-terms, for his role in the Uranium One, FBI cover up. lol. So, if you're disturbed now, well buckle up!


https://www.dailywire.com/news/30632/bombshell-muellers-fbi-worked-closely-russian-ryan-saavedra
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/20...ting-paul-manaforts-russian-business-partner/
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/t...emoved-and-his-partisan-hit-squad-dismantled/

http://www.newsweek.com/how-robert-mueller-connected-probe-hillary-clintons-uranium-one-deal-688548
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/t...emoved-and-his-partisan-hit-squad-dismantled/
Click to expand...

If you're looking to convince people on the other side, please consider using more moderate and factual sources (newsweek notwithstanding).

Daily Wire:
RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: The Daily Wire is a politically conservative American news and opinion website founded in 2015 by conservative political commentator Ben Shapiro, who currently serves as Editor-in-Chief. The Daily Wire presents news with a right wing bias in reporting and wording. Virtually every story favors the right and denigrates the left. The Daily Wire has also published false information such as this and this from Ben Shapiro. The Daily Wire is a far right biased news source that is Mixed for factual reporting. (9/2/2016) Updated (8/16/2017)
Click to expand...

Red State:
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: Red State is a news opinion blog run by Erick Erickson, a TV and radio commentator. The information on the blog has loaded language and is right biased based on story selection. Erick Erickson does not have a great track record with fact checkers. (7/19/2016) Updated (4/6/2017)
Click to expand...

Daily Caller:
RIGHT BIAS
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: The Daily Caller is an American news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C.. It was founded by Tucker Carlson, a libertarian conservative political pundit, and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney. The Daily Caller produces sensational headlines and has a right wing bias in reporting and has made false claims according to Snopes and Politifact. (7/19/2016) Updated (4/21/2017)
Click to expand...
 
nytigerfan said:
Lol. I don’t know what is more disturbing. That you link to Breitbart as a credible source of news, or that you link to a Breitbart article from last year and try to pass it off as today’s breaking news.
Click to expand...


I know you might find these sites as a disturbing place to get news; you probably haven't read or heard about this from from any of your sources. Am I right? Remember Admiral Rogers is the one that visited Trump in December '14 and told him the FBI/DOJ was spying on him. Also remember when Trump said he was being "wire tapped" before the inauguration, how you and all your "news sources" were making fun of him? Again, am I right? Well, if I'm not mistaken, Admiral Rogers is performing one last duty today. He's testifying before Congress about the bullsh!t FISA warrant. Started at 9:15, behind closed doors. They're also dragging that lying, leaking, POS Brennan back in also.
So, you guys just keep hanging in there.
On 2nd thought, no I won't post a link. Might disturb you.
 
orangelvis said:
That's just choice! So who provided you this Snopes or some other alt-left, bs site? LOL!!
Click to expand...

I linked my source just like you did. Also, your sources having information that no one else has reported on is only worthwhile if that stuff is true. National Enquirer reports on a lot of things no one else is talking about but it's not considered news. As far as I'm aware, the things that you are so excitedly blathering on about have been discredited by actual news sources (e.g. wiretapping Trump).

EDIT: Thank you for clarifying it's pointless to discuss things with you. If you're allowed to just make up claims about news sources and cite whatever you want to as fact, there's no reason to try and do this.
 
FLaw47 said:
I linked my source just like you did. Also, your sources having information that no one else has reported on is only worthwhile if that stuff is true. National Enquirer reports on a lot of things no one else is talking about but it's not considered news. As far as I'm aware, the things that you are so excitedly blathering on about have been discredited by actual news sources (e.g. wiretapping Trump).

EDIT: Thank you for clarifying it's pointless to discuss things with you. If you're allowed to just make up claims about news sources and cite whatever you want to as fact, there's no reason to try and do this.
Click to expand...

Have time for one more. Why would the Freedom Caucus, in your mind, a bunch of right wing wackos, be pressing soooooooo hard for Trump to release the documents. You know he has Constitutional authority to do so, right? I've already mentioned why he's waiting in a previous post.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/16/meadows-jordan-desantis-call-on-trump-to-release-justice-docs/

Ok, so you never believe DailyCaller. Here it is from the horse's mouth.



Also, I can show that your fact check site has bias. Everyone has bias. What's the point in arguing that? We all have to decide what's true for ourselves. I've found from experience the news sites that do the best job. I read stuff from left-wing bias also. The worst thing I've found from the left winged media, which is most of it, is that they purposely do not report things that don't meet their narrative. They all tow a line and report the same things all day long. They also do very little investigate reporting. They just parrot whatever the lib talking point is for the day, but I do read it. What I don't understand is people who won't even read an article from Breitbart, even if it's sourced and quoted, but that's an individual prerogative.

https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest/


 
Last edited:
orangelvis said:
Have time for one more. Why would the Freedom Caucus, in your mind, a bunch of right wing wackos, be pressing soooooooo hard for Trump to release the documents. You know he has Constitutional authority to do so, right? I've already mentioned why he's waiting in a previous post.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/16/meadows-jordan-desantis-call-on-trump-to-release-justice-docs/

Also, I can show that your fact check site has bias. Everyone has bias. What's the point in arguing that? We all have to decide what's true for ourselves. I've found from experience the news sites that do the best job. I read stuff from left-wing bias also. The worst thing I've found from the left winged media, which is most of it, is that they purposely do not report things that don't meet their narrative. They all tow a line and report the same things all day long. They also do very little investigate reporting. They just parrot whatever the lib talking point is for the day, but I do read it. What I don't understand is people who won't even read an article from Breitbart, even if it's sourced and quoted, but that's an individual prerogative.

https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest/
Click to expand...

Neither of us believes the "facts" the other person cites. Have a nice internet.

EDIT: Also your link "proving" bias on MediaBiasFactCheck was a load of crock. The site says that they're willing to to review their ratings if challenged. They did review their assessment of JustFacts and JustFactsDaily and adjusted their scores accordingly. I also think their claim that not panning Politifact for having a "Pants on Fire" rating is a sign of bias is absurd. That's not politically charged language; it's language about the deliberate nature of certain lies and is not specific to one party.
tl;dr JustFacts got pissy about getting a rating they didn't like, the rating was reviewed and changed, JustFacts then moved the goalpost.
 
Last edited:
Well, well well...looks like the NYT has no choice now, but to start printing some truth; even though it's a sugar coated version. Their leaker was surely one or some the perps who are trying to get out in front of what's coming.
I'm going to continue linking news in this thread. When everything flushes out, some of you guys will have an easy place to go back and reference what actually happened.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...fbi-ran-spy-operation-against-trump-campaign/
 
Last edited:
Here are things we know to be true. The FBI investigation is/was run by Repubs. Comey, Mueller, Sessions, Rosendtein, FISA Judges. Manafort offered to sell election updates to a Putin connected oligarch to whom he owed millions; Carter Page was a Russian agent according to FBI; Popodoupolos bragged to Australian diplomat that Trump had Russian dirt on Hillary; Trump Jr, Kushner, Manafort met with Russians attempting to get dirt on Hillary; CIA warned Trump campaign and Clinton Campaign of Russian interference and Trump campaign reported nothing. In Dec 2015 Trump defended Putin while unknown to us he was trying to build Trump Tower in Russia. Mueller was a decorated Marine in Vietnam, a life of unblemished public service. Trump has a life history of being a compulsive liar and cheater in business and in his marriage. On top of that he can't which bullsht foot kept him out of military service. So, based on the foregoing when it comes to a swearing contest between the piece of crap that occupies the Whitehouse and Bob Mueller, the choice is obvious.
 
Woody1405 said:
Here are things we know to be true. The FBI investigation is/was run by Repubs. Comey, Mueller, Sessions, Rosendtein, FISA Judges. Manafort offered to sell election updates to a Putin connected oligarch to whom he owed millions; Carter Page was a Russian agent according to FBI; Popodoupolos bragged to Australian diplomat that Trump had Russian dirt on Hillary; Trump Jr, Kushner, Manafort met with Russians attempting to get dirt on Hillary; CIA warned Trump campaign and Clinton Campaign of Russian interference and Trump campaign reported nothing. In Dec 2015 Trump defended Putin while unknown to us he was trying to build Trump Tower in Russia. Mueller was a decorated Marine in Vietnam, a life of unblemished public service. Trump has a life history of being a compulsive liar and cheater in business and in his marriage. On top of that he can't which bullsht foot kept him out of military service. So, based on the foregoing when it comes to a swearing contest between the piece of crap that occupies the Whitehouse and Bob Mueller, the choice is obvious.
Click to expand...

Do you work for CNN? Your narrative is so disconnected from the truth. Disturbing.
 
Rychek4 said:
For a small local thing, Hell yes. For a difficult federal thing, Hell no.
Click to expand...

Interesting. But in any case, he's unavailable. Possibly for at least 47 years.

I gotta say - this whole thing probably did NOT go the way he envisioned......

(I mean based on the numbers, Daniels wound up PAYING to have sex with Trump!)

And I was right about something else too - a Trump presidency is a lot of things, but it sure as hell isn't boring!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rychek4
CUtiger (actual) said:
president-barack-obama-bowe-bergdahl-parents.jpg


iLKBBKb.gif


obama_1523079c.jpg


abc_gma_tapper_090731_ms.jpg


obama.jpg



Maybe you’re too young to remember our last president. And that’s with about 2 seconds of research.


Quick reminder- Obama was so bad he was able to get the United States population to elect a reality tv star as his successor.​
Click to expand...
Truer words were never spoken!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

chassc

OT: Who Are Some of Your Favorite Supporting Characters in Movies?

Replies
99
Views
2K
The West Zone
Walhalla Wildman
Walhalla Wildman
cgresha

Tiger vs MJ

Replies
42
Views
2K
The West Zone
vhh1
V
other1

THINKIN' OF PUTIN

Replies
0
Views
189
House Of Politics & Off-Topics
other1
other1
Larry_Williams

*****It blows my mind

Replies
47
Views
3K
The West Zone
JITIGER
JITIGER
navytiger

Will Clemson get a bona fide former NFL GM like UNC?

Replies
44
Views
3K
The West Zone
DW4_2016
DW4_2016
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back