MR

steveo777 wrote:Illegal alien who killed Kate Steinle has been found not guilty by a San Francisco jury. He could have been found guilty of murder, at lease murder two, and at minimum manslaughter. All we got is a guilty on a felon in possession of a firearm. The fucker had multiple felony convictions had had been deported five times! All the media has been concerned with is defending his ethnicity and the liberal jury probably rendered that verdict as a "fuck you" to Trump. Build that fucking wall!

Let me guess...you played the lead white cop in 'Detroit'.

S2M wrote:

steveo777 wrote:Illegal alien who killed Kate Steinle has been found not guilty by a San Francisco jury. He could have been found guilty of murder, at lease murder two, and at minimum manslaughter. All we got is a guilty on a felon in possession of a firearm. The fucker had multiple felony convictions had had been deported five times! All the media has been concerned with is defending his ethnicity and the liberal jury probably rendered that verdict as a "fuck you" to Trump. Build that fucking wall!

Let me guess...you played the lead white cop in 'Detroit'.

Bullshit...don't try to defend it. He should go down for life under California's three strikes law. Should have already been in prison for multiple felonies. I have no compassion for that asshole illegal whatsoever. Does Kate matter to you libs, or do you care more about illegal aliens?

steveo777 wrote:

S2M wrote:

steveo777 wrote:Illegal alien who killed Kate Steinle has been found not guilty by a San Francisco jury. He could have been found guilty of murder, at lease murder two, and at minimum manslaughter. All we got is a guilty on a felon in possession of a firearm. The fucker had multiple felony convictions had had been deported five times! All the media has been concerned with is defending his ethnicity and the liberal jury probably rendered that verdict as a "fuck you" to Trump. Build that fucking wall!

Let me guess...you played the lead white cop in 'Detroit'.

Bullshit...don't try to defend it. He should go down for life under California's three strikes law. Should have already been in prison for multiple felonies. I have no compassion for that asshole illegal whatsoever. Does Kate matter to you libs, or do you care more about illegal aliens?

And, the above is why there is such a thing as a jury....and why you would not be on it.

K.C.Journey Fan wrote:Also why you don't understand how it works. Just like in the O.J. case and the Manedez case, the prosecution sucked. The family got screwed. Again people, look at what the liberals on here are defending, remember it next year, and vote.

Once again, I'm NOT a liberal. I just find it highly suspect that this is a Trump thread, and there's hardly ANY criticism at all pointed at him. Goes to credibility.

Also why you don't understand how it works. Just like in the O.J. case and the Manedez case, the prosecution sucked. The family got screwed. Again people, look at what the liberals on here are defending, remember it next year, and vote.

Defending? I did not defend the verdict.

I am simply saying that someone like who is so biased and has already decided the guilt of the defendent would never be chosen to be a member of the jury.

But, since YOU brought it up...

You did not hear the evidence as presented to the jury. You did not hear the jury instructions from the judge. You did not participate in the discussion of the jury which decided the verdict. You only know what you read and hear on the news, which is NOT going to be a full picture...and is obviously going to be biased.

For you to blame the prosecution for "losing" the cause is essentialy an empty accusation because you are completely ignorant of much of what happened in court and, especially, deliberations.

Have you ever even participated in a jury that decided a violent crime case?

S2M wrote:Once again, I'm NOT a liberal. I just find it highly suspect that this is a Trump thread, and there's hardly ANY criticism at all pointed at him. Goes to credibility.

So in effect you are saying that since this is a Trump thread automatically there should be criticism of him presented here. A forum is a place where people express their opinions and thoughts. If there is little criticism expressed then maybe others don't share your criticism. Please explain whom or what is stopping YOU from expressing the criticisms you have about Trump? I don't think anything or anyone is stopping you. By all means post them to your hearts content.

Michael Flynn promised "full cooperation to the Mueller team" and is prepared to testify that as a candidate, Donald Trump "directed him to make contact with the Russians."

Buzzinga

I love how the left is like "OMG, so and so talked to the Russians"

There is nothing illegal about anyone talking to the Russians, unless it can be demonstrated that there was some kind of quid pro quo, aka pay to play, or other pass through of information detrimental to national security. Seems Hillary fits that bill much better than Trump and nothing happened to her. Nothing is gonna happen to Trump.

My first instinct upon reading about the Flynn indictments was to think surely, some "Republican" on the melodic rock Forum board must concede that the Trump presidency is now in serious peril.


Turns out I was wrong.

How is that nothing Burger? Good Lord. Literally the entire Trump Administration is about to go down in flames. Conspiracy, corruption, racketeering, electioneering just to name a few. You guys were outraged when Obama put mustard on a hamburger, but now you're trying to make excuses for the most criminally corrupt presidency in the history of democracy?

Seven Wishes wrote:My first instinct upon reading about the Flynn indictments was to think surely, some "Republican" on the melodic rock Forum board must concede that the Trump presidency is now in serious peril.


Turns out I was wrong.

How is that nothing Burger? Good Lord. Literally the entire Trump Administration is about to go down in flames. Conspiracy, corruption, racketeering, electioneering just to name a few. You guys were outraged when Obama put mustard on a hamburger, but now you're trying to make excuses for the most criminally corrupt presidency in the history of democracy?

I agree...the only person who seems to be on the outside of all of this is Pence...

If you put together a timeline of all of the events that we know about, along with Trump's tweets and campaign speeches, it's already obvious what was going on....Trump asking for help from the Russians and Wikileaks, in return for easing sanctions and being a pussy towards Russia. Now you can add Flynn as a witness and I think it's just a matter of time before Trump has a choice of either resigning or being impeached...for conspiring against the United States, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power,.. And, that isn't even looking at what Jr. and Kushner were involved with. Trump can pardon his family for federal crimes and resign, and Pence can pardon Trump...and then who knows what state crimes have been uncovered...and they will ALL have to face those, pardon or not.

steveo777 wrote:I love how the left is like "OMG, so and so talked to the Russians"

You need to reread that. He was DIRECTED TO TALK TO RUSSIA BY TRUMP.

Flynn was already in the shit. He son was in the shit. So, he made a deal with Mueller. Do you really think Mueller would make a deal with Flynn for his testimony if all they talked about was their favorite vodka? You don't make a deal unless you get something good out of it:

There is nothing illegal about anyone talking to the Russians, unless it can be demonstrated that there was some kind of quid pro quo, aka pay to play, or other pass through of information detrimental to national security. Seems Hillary fits that bill much better than Trump and nothing happened to her. Nothing is gonna happen to Trump.

You are so focused on Clinton, it's sad really. Trump is the one who has a special prosecutor right now...and I doubt Mueller cares about what Clinton did or did not do...unless it is related to his own investigation. You all should have ignored Hillary a LONG time ago and focused on 2016/2017...you know the REAL world.

K.C.Journey Fan wrote:Contact about what? Trump was about to become President.I'm sure he tried to contact many leaders. Who was promptly fired by Trump for lying to Pence? Bullshitga, that's what you have.

Contacting "the Russians" is not a crime. Once again, NO CRIME has been presented.

K.C.Journey Fan wrote:

Monker wrote:Michael Flynn promised "full cooperation to the Mueller team" and is prepared to testify that as a candidate, Donald Trump "directed him to make contact with the Russians."

Buzzinga

Contact about what? Trump was about to become President.I'm sure he tried to contact many leaders. Who was promptly fired by Trump for lying to Pence? Bullshitga, that's what you have.

So, how do you know when Pence was ordered to talk to Russia? Pence with with Trump during the entire campaign. IMO, this order came down long before Trump knew he would be President. I would think it's probably around the same time as the Kushner meeting and when Trump asked Russia for the missing Emails.

Ordinarily I would concur, but based on what I'm reading, I think Pence is knee-deep in this pile of treason s***.

Queue the loony, factoid-quoting, Drudge and Breitbart worshipping, tin foil hat-wearing, Trumpiophiles in 3...2...1..

Seven Wishes wrote:My first instinct upon reading about the Flynn indictments was to think surely, some "Republican" on the melodic rock Forum board must concede that the Trump presidency is now in serious peril.


Turns out I was wrong.

How is that nothing Burger? Good Lord. Literally the entire Trump Administration is about to go down in flames. Conspiracy, corruption, racketeering, electioneering just to name a few. You guys were outraged when Obama put mustard on a hamburger, but now you're trying to make excuses for the most criminally corrupt presidency in the history of democracy?

Really? Point me where such indictments for the crimes you list are known to exist. Fact is what you are presenting here is all speculation. Just because someone says they agree to cooperate with an investigation doesn't mean there IS evidence of crime. When Hillary was interviewed by the FBI for the email server investigation, people that supported her did not go Ah ha! she is guilty of something.

As far as the "nothing burger", it still is and will be until or IF such indictments are made and known to the public. All you are doing is putting the cart before the horse.

Monker wrote:Trump asking for help from the Russians and Wikileaks, in return for easing sanctions and being a pussy towards Russia.

Please present FACTUAL EVIDENCE that supports this claim.

Monker wrote: think it's just a matter of time before Trump has a choice of either resigning or being impeached...for conspiring against the United States, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power,..

Please present FACTUAL EVIDENCE that supports this claim.

Monker wrote:And, that isn't even looking at what Jr. and Kushner were involved with.

Be specific and present FACTUAL EVIDENCE that supports it.

Boomchild wrote:

Monker wrote:Trump asking for help from the Russians and Wikileaks, in return for easing sanctions and being a pussy towards Russia.

Please present FACTUAL EVIDENCE that supports this claim.

Monker wrote: think it's just a matter of time before Trump has a choice of either resigning or being impeached...for conspiring against the United States, obstruction of justice, and abuse of power,..

Please present FACTUAL EVIDENCE that supports this claim.

Monker wrote:And, that isn't even looking at what Jr. and Kushner were involved with.

Be specific and present FACTUAL EVIDENCE that supports it.

He can't. He's one of those who think allegations and hearsay are the same as evidence.
That's what watching CNN does to people's heads.

What's this about a nearly-500-page tax bill, with handwritten margin notes, that politicians are expected to vote on within a few hours?

verslibre wrote:What's this about a nearly-500-page tax bill, with handwritten margin notes, that politicians are expected to vote on within a few hours?

What was that about a healthcare bill that they had to vote on before they could find out what was in it?

^Deflection.

steveo777 wrote:

verslibre wrote:What's this about a nearly-500-page tax bill, with handwritten margin notes, that politicians are expected to vote on within a few hours?

What was that about a healthcare bill that they had to vote on before they could find out what was in it?

All too easy.

As a tax payer, I sure would like my money back for all this special prosecutor stuff. Flynn had already been asked to resign and Justice Dept could have handled him.

Obama folks met with world leaders prior to his being elected. This whole thing was after the president had been elected and frankly he can do whatever he likes at that point. My quite simple mind would lay about $1,000 dollars down that just like every other past administration, his transition team took calls and met with tons of foreign leaders.

I'm pretty sure that to have collusion, the act (an act that's actually wrong and not what has been described thus far) would have had to occur prior to the election. And even then, collusion isn't even a crime.

Look, I think there are far better things to spend our money on then what we have gotten out of this. If Justice, the FBI, and the IRS did their jobs, Manafort and Flynn would have been swiftly dealt with. We already have mechanisms for all of this. So far, it has been a colossal waste of tax payer dollars. Colossal! I find it shameful. As much as some wish for this somehow to be some big thing, it's just small stuff. Manafort should fry but at the hands of the Justice Department. Everything else so far is just as a dumb waste of time and money.

Fact Finder wrote:Hold on here...

ABC has just issued a retraction
and it's starting to reverberate across the twatter-sphere
so Flynn's plea deal is a massive NOTHINGBURGER with respect to Trump

and that's just for starters

CNN's Jim Acosta is also reporting that it wasn't anyone from Trump's circle
but in fact someone in the Obummer administration that directed Flynn to talk to Russians

Let that sink in

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... th-russian

So, IF the Obama administration OK'd Flynn to communicate with the Russian ambassador as part of the transition process then why would Flynn lie about the communication and then plead guilty to it? James Clapper claims the statement is false. Which coming from him I would take with a grain of salt. Clapper lied under oath about the public being under surveillance. So if he would lie under oath I think he would have no problem doing so when not.

Memorex wrote:As a tax payer, I sure would like my money back for all this special prosecutor stuff. Flynn had already been asked to resign and Justice Dept could have handled him.

Obama folks met with world leaders prior to his being elected. This whole thing was after the president had been elected and frankly he can do whatever he likes at that point. My quite simple mind would lay about $1,000 dollars down that just like every other past administration, his transition team took calls and met with tons of foreign leaders.

I'm pretty sure that to have collusion, the act (an act that's actually wrong and not what has been described thus far) would have had to occur prior to the election. And even then, collusion isn't even a crime.

Look, I think there are far better things to spend our money on then what we have gotten out of this. If Justice, the FBI, and the IRS did their jobs, Manafort and Flynn would have been swiftly dealt with. We already have mechanisms for all of this. So far, it has been a colossal waste of tax payer dollars. Colossal! I find it shameful. As much as some wish for this somehow to be some big thing, it's just small stuff. Manafort should fry but at the hands of the Justice Department. Everything else so far is just as a dumb waste of time and money.

This is what happens when you have a big bloated government.

Lionel Lebron's statement about Flynn's guilty plea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXdQm4NkDaU

Boomchild wrote:

steveo777 wrote:

verslibre wrote:What's this about a nearly-500-page tax bill, with handwritten margin notes, that politicians are expected to vote on within a few hours?

What was that about a healthcare bill that they had to vote on before they could find out what was in it?

All too easy.

Why is it easy to accuse the Democrats of one thing and refuse to acknowledge that Republicans did THE EXACT SAME THING?

As was said, this is deflection. But, it is also hypocrisy on your part. If it is wrong for Democrats to pass huge bills with an attitude of "we'll know what's in it after it is passed", then it is wrong when Republicans do it, too.

Boomchild wrote:Lionel Lebron's statement about Flynn's guilty plea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXdQm4NkDaU

My God, this guy is a mumbling, fumbling, idiot.

First of all, he is presenting this idea that Mueller "has to present SOMETHING". No, he doesn't. That's just a flat out lie. He has to do the job he was assigned, and that is all.

Flynn was in the shit. They had him from multiple direction, and his son. They didn't have to come to an agreement with Flynn. They had enough "dirt" on him to put him in jail for most of the rest of his life, and his son for years. So, for a plea agreement to make any kind of sense, Flynn had to have something of AT LEAST equal value to give. We have barely heard what Flynn has given...and to assume all Flynn is is some fall guy so Mueller can show progress is laughable wishful thinking.

The only thing this guy said that makes sense is "take the 5th.." to avoid where Flynn is. That is somewhat true. But, it also gives the impression that there is something to hide. So, if you talk to the FBI, you had better not be lying or you will end up in being prosecuted.

The FACT that Trump is a pathological liar, it would not surprise me AT ALL if both Jr. and Kushner were encouraged to lie to hide how much cooperation there was between Russia and the Trump campaign...which means they will be in this same situation...either make a deal and turn on Trump Sr., or go to jail for a LONG TIME. Their choice...

Boomchild wrote:

Fact Finder wrote:Hold on here...

ABC has just issued a retraction
and it's starting to reverberate across the twatter-sphere
so Flynn's plea deal is a massive NOTHINGBURGER with respect to Trump

and that's just for starters

CNN's Jim Acosta is also reporting that it wasn't anyone from Trump's circle
but in fact someone in the Obummer administration that directed Flynn to talk to Russians

Let that sink in

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... th-russian

So, IF the Obama administration OK'd Flynn to communicate with the Russian ambassador as part of the transition process then why would Flynn lie about the communication and then plead guilty to it? James Clapper claims the statement is false. Which coming from him I would take with a grain of salt. Clapper lied under oath about the public being under surveillance. So if he would lie under oath I think he would have no problem doing so when not.

This is simply NOT TRUE. Undermining the current President's foreign policy is a violation of the Logan Act. Yeah, it's obscure and never used. But, IT IS THE LAW. And, the evidence seems to show that Trump worked to undermine the Obama policies with Russia by making deals to remove sanctions and such.

Flynn would lie about communicating with the ambassador if the conversations were about trading Russian support for removing sanctions. Or, ANYTHING similar to this.

Monker wrote:

Boomchild wrote:

Fact Finder wrote:Hold on here...

ABC has just issued a retraction
and it's starting to reverberate across the twatter-sphere
so Flynn's plea deal is a massive NOTHINGBURGER with respect to Trump

and that's just for starters

CNN's Jim Acosta is also reporting that it wasn't anyone from Trump's circle
but in fact someone in the Obummer administration that directed Flynn to talk to Russians

Let that sink in

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... th-russian

So, IF the Obama administration OK'd Flynn to communicate with the Russian ambassador as part of the transition process then why would Flynn lie about the communication and then plead guilty to it? James Clapper claims the statement is false. Which coming from him I would take with a grain of salt. Clapper lied under oath about the public being under surveillance. So if he would lie under oath I think he would have no problem doing so when not.

This is simply NOT TRUE. Undermining the current President's foreign policy is a violation of the Logan Act. Yeah, it's obscure and never used. But, IT IS THE LAW. And, the evidence seems to show that Trump worked to undermine the Obama policies with Russia by making deals to remove sanctions and such.

Flynn would lie about communicating with the ambassador if the conversations were about trading Russian support for removing sanctions. Or, ANYTHING similar to this.

Monker. Please. Read this article. Just read it and be sensible. This rabid craziness in this country has got to stop.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/washi ... olicy.html