The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread
- Thread starter Nonononono
- Start date
If the House and Senate act like Americans as the original content and intent of the Constitution provide, t will be out on his ear. However, there is no assurance that MMcC will allow an impeachment voted by the House to get time for consideration on the floor of the Senate. I'm not sure whether or not he will be forced into it by law and tradition, or whether he might have some power to delay or totally block an impeachment trial. Given the demonstrated partisan nature of the Senate (for example, they approved Kavanaugh despite his committing obvious perjury during his confirmation hearings), it is highly unlikely that t would be voted out by impeachment, since that requires 2/3 of the Senate, or about 20 Republicans and all the Democrats and independents.
However, the Democrats in the House may be able to have their cake and eat it too - they can vote for impeachment, which only requires a majority of the House, and time it so that all Republicans running for office in 2020 (especially those seeking re-election) will have to declare whether and why they support t, even if there is no formal impeachment trial in the Senate. It could be the end of the Republican Party, foundering on a hopeless point, similar to what happened to the Whig Party in the 1850's when all the anti-slavery Whigs moved to the then-new Republican Party.
The hearings alone will be very damaging to Trump.
But hey, they might do hearings that are damaging to James Comey.
That's the one you were continually thrown out
of for always showing up with a " Blunt " stick....
Hüsker Dü
DA
Maybe we are a nation that Trump represents well. Maybe we are that callous, that inhumane, uneducated, crude, amoral, unconcerned about the future, anti-democracy, greedy, anti-science, deliberately ignorant, dishonest, oblivious to the actual tenets of the religion we purport to adhere to while demonizing all others. Maybe we are the rude Americans people around the world dread and laugh at, maybe, but I hope not. I hope that we are better than that, that we actually strive to be the "shining city upon a hill".
Bruddah IZ
DA
“I like all races. Even the bad ones.” I think Joe just met his match in the Democrat Party.
Bruddah IZ
DA
A newer, bigger circus tent.
Hüsker Dü
DA
'Elites' on one side, 'minorities' and 'others' on the other, and there you are the poor mistreated, forgotten and aggrieved stuck in the middle . . . where else would you go besides the comforting arms of the one who is telling you 'they' are the threat to your way of life, and he, only he can save you.
You and the " Party " YOU represent are the Laughing
stock around this whole planet....
You have 23 Male and Female Joseph Stalin's, Adolph Hitler's, Imelda Marcos's,
Robert Mugabe's, Daniel Ortega's, Manuel Noriega's, Augusto Pinochet's,
Fidel Castro's, Saddam Hussein's, Wu Zetian's ...Etc...all trying to take the
office of the Presidency by Hook or Crook....!
Nonononono
PREMIER
I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.
Hüsker Dü
DA
. . . but he now has his "Roy Cohn".
Nonononono
PREMIER
Sheriff Joe
DA
No and you know it, why would you ask?
Sheriff Joe
DA
Just answer the fucking question.
Nonononono
PREMIER
If you’d read news sources other than your daily stormer sites, you’d know the answer. Yet you don’t.
Sheriff Joe
DA
You people.
MSNBC Guest Calls For Literal Mob Of Pitchforks And Torches Outside Trump Donor's Home
Timothy Meads | Aug 09, 2019 5:00 PM
Source: MSNBC.com
Earlier this week Rep. Joaquin Castro in Texas "named and shamed" San Antonio supporters of President Donald J. Trump in what he says was an effort to get these Americans to think twice before being "complicit in white supremacy." Anybody with common sense understood the move was dangerous, especially coming from a public official, as it could paint a target on these individuals' backs regardless if the information was already public or not. On MSNBC Thursday night, guest Elie Mystal took the hysteria over supporting President Trump one step further, saying that protesters should form literal mobs outside the SoulCycle and Equinox chairman's home in the Hamptons due to his support for the commander-in-chief.
"People of color are already targeted under this administration," Mystal said Thursday night regarding Rep. Castro's actions. "I have no problem with shining the light back on the donors who fund this kind of racialized hate."
"I mean I go further, I want pitchforks and torches outside [Stephen Ross'] house in the Hamptons," Mystal continued. "I've been to the Hamptons, it's very nice. There's no reason why it has to be. There's no reason he should be able to have a nice little party. There's no reason why people shouldn't be able to be outside of his house and making their voices peacefully understood."
The MSNBC host, Chris Hayes, agreed that this mob would simply be an expression of the First Amendment.
"Demonstrating, totally...There have been peaceful protests outside Mitch McConnell's house," Hayes added. "And I imagine there will be peaceful protests outside of this...It is all speech, right? Peaceful protest. The right to the assembly under the First Amendment."
This week, the "peaceful" protester's outside Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's home said they wished somebody would "stab the motherf*cker in the heart." The "mo-fo" was in reference to Sen. McConnell.
MSNBC Guest Calls For Literal Mob Of Pitchforks And Torches Outside Trump Donor's Home
Timothy Meads | Aug 09, 2019 5:00 PM
Source: MSNBC.com
Earlier this week Rep. Joaquin Castro in Texas "named and shamed" San Antonio supporters of President Donald J. Trump in what he says was an effort to get these Americans to think twice before being "complicit in white supremacy." Anybody with common sense understood the move was dangerous, especially coming from a public official, as it could paint a target on these individuals' backs regardless if the information was already public or not. On MSNBC Thursday night, guest Elie Mystal took the hysteria over supporting President Trump one step further, saying that protesters should form literal mobs outside the SoulCycle and Equinox chairman's home in the Hamptons due to his support for the commander-in-chief.
"People of color are already targeted under this administration," Mystal said Thursday night regarding Rep. Castro's actions. "I have no problem with shining the light back on the donors who fund this kind of racialized hate."
"I mean I go further, I want pitchforks and torches outside [Stephen Ross'] house in the Hamptons," Mystal continued. "I've been to the Hamptons, it's very nice. There's no reason why it has to be. There's no reason he should be able to have a nice little party. There's no reason why people shouldn't be able to be outside of his house and making their voices peacefully understood."
The MSNBC host, Chris Hayes, agreed that this mob would simply be an expression of the First Amendment.
"Demonstrating, totally...There have been peaceful protests outside Mitch McConnell's house," Hayes added. "And I imagine there will be peaceful protests outside of this...It is all speech, right? Peaceful protest. The right to the assembly under the First Amendment."
This week, the "peaceful" protester's outside Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's home said they wished somebody would "stab the motherf*cker in the heart." The "mo-fo" was in reference to Sen. McConnell.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Do you people know this guy is a commie?
Look it up.
ICYMI: Brennan’s Role in Russia Collusion Hoax Becomes Clearer (Despite What Appear To Be Multiple Perjuries)
Posted at 5:30 pm on August 09, 2019 by Sarah Lee
The question of who knew the full scope of the Russia collusion hoax has, thus far, remained unanswered. The bit players like Bruce Ohr and Peter Strzok seemed to understand their role in carrying out what Strzok called “the insurance policy”, but surely someone knew what all the disparate moving pieces were doing.
As mentioned, that question is unanswered. But there are candidates, one being former CIA Director John Brennan, who has popped back up again in the news as someone who, even if he turns out to be simply one of the moving pieces in the larger scheme to denigrate the Trump campaign with false allegations of Russia connections, may have perjured himself (again) before Congress nonetheless.
Here’s American Greatness pulling from a July 29 Maria Bartiromo interview with House Oversight member Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA):
During an interview with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo Sunday morning, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) suggested that former CIA director John Brennan lied under oath to Congress in May 2017.
In written testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, Brennan claimed that he had briefed each member of the so-called Gang of Eight about “Russian attempts to interfere in the election” between August 11, 2016 and September 6, 2016.
…
After his meeting with Brennan, Reid fired off a letter to FBI Director James Comey demanding an investigation into “the questions raised” in the Clinton/DNC/Steele dossier.
But Nunes told Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures” that he and former Speaker Paul Ryan were never told about the Steele Dossier, which contained allegations about Russian interference and contacts with the Trump campaign.
“The CIA has mostly come clean about its activities during the 2016 election,” Nunes said. “The only one who has questions to answer is John Brennan,” he added. “We now know that John Brennan briefed Harry Reid on the dossier in August of 2016,” Nunes said. “At the same time, he never briefed me or Paul Ryan, who was the Speaker of the House at the time.”
That letter to Comey is, of course, one of the more compelling parts of all this. It was a useful bit of paper trail that would appear to justify an investigation into the Trump campaign and maybe even retroactively justify the (we know now) possibly illegally obtained FISA warrants themselves.
And, if you read the American Greatness piece all the way through, the question is less a timeline question of when Reid and the Gang of Eight were briefed and more a question of what Brennan told Reid. Specifically, if it was different from what he says he told other members of the Gang of Eight.
Here’s what Brennan told Congress:
“Again, in consultation with the White House, I personally briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership,” Brennan wrote. “I provided the same briefing to each Gang of Eight member. Given the highly sensitive nature of what was in what was an active counterintelligence case, involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”
Why was Harry getting different information and did Brennan lie about it? Nunes seems to be saying he thinks that just might be the case.
Of course, As Victor David Hanson has pointed out, Brennan lying to Congress has become almost par for the course:
In 2011, Brennan, then the country’s chief counterterrorism adviser, had sworn to Congress that scores of drones strikes abroad had not killed a single noncombatant — at a time when both the president and the CIA were both receiving numerous reports of civilian collateral deaths.
In 2014, John Brennan, now as CIA director, lied emphatically that the CIA had not illegally accessed the computers of U.S. Senate staffers who were then exploring a CIA role in torturing detainees. Or as he told Andrea Mitchell: “As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. . . . We wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we do.” Brennan’s chronic deceptions drew the ire of a number of liberal senators, some of whom echoed the Washington Post’s call for his immediate resignation. After months of prevarications, but only upon release of the CIA inspector general’s report, Brennan apologized to the senators he had deceived.
Brennan, in May 2017, as an ex-CIA director, again almost certainly did not tell the truth to Congress when he testified in answer to Representative Trey Gowdy’s questions that he neither knew who had commissioned the Steele dossier nor had the CIA relied on its contents for any action. Yet both the retired National Security Agency director, Michael Rogers, and the former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, have conceded that the Steele dossier — along with the knowledge that it was a Clinton-campaign-funded product — most certainly did help shape the Obama’s intelligence communality interagency assessments and actions, often under the urging of Brennan himself.
There are also numerous reports that, despite his denials about knowledge of the dossier, Brennan served as a stealthy conduit to ensure that it was disseminated widely, at least in the sense of meeting in August 2016 with Senator Harry Reid to brief the senator about its unverified contents in hopes that he would pressure the FBI to further its investigations, which Reid did in a call two days later to James Comey.
The blame game continues but at some point the finger will land somewhere and on someone as the puller of puppet strings. As Brennan’s role comes more into focus, he’s becoming much easier to find behind the curtain.
Look it up.
ICYMI: Brennan’s Role in Russia Collusion Hoax Becomes Clearer (Despite What Appear To Be Multiple Perjuries)
Posted at 5:30 pm on August 09, 2019 by Sarah Lee
The question of who knew the full scope of the Russia collusion hoax has, thus far, remained unanswered. The bit players like Bruce Ohr and Peter Strzok seemed to understand their role in carrying out what Strzok called “the insurance policy”, but surely someone knew what all the disparate moving pieces were doing.
As mentioned, that question is unanswered. But there are candidates, one being former CIA Director John Brennan, who has popped back up again in the news as someone who, even if he turns out to be simply one of the moving pieces in the larger scheme to denigrate the Trump campaign with false allegations of Russia connections, may have perjured himself (again) before Congress nonetheless.
Here’s American Greatness pulling from a July 29 Maria Bartiromo interview with House Oversight member Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA):
During an interview with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo Sunday morning, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) suggested that former CIA director John Brennan lied under oath to Congress in May 2017.
In written testimony to the House Intelligence Committee, Brennan claimed that he had briefed each member of the so-called Gang of Eight about “Russian attempts to interfere in the election” between August 11, 2016 and September 6, 2016.
…
After his meeting with Brennan, Reid fired off a letter to FBI Director James Comey demanding an investigation into “the questions raised” in the Clinton/DNC/Steele dossier.
But Nunes told Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures” that he and former Speaker Paul Ryan were never told about the Steele Dossier, which contained allegations about Russian interference and contacts with the Trump campaign.
“The CIA has mostly come clean about its activities during the 2016 election,” Nunes said. “The only one who has questions to answer is John Brennan,” he added. “We now know that John Brennan briefed Harry Reid on the dossier in August of 2016,” Nunes said. “At the same time, he never briefed me or Paul Ryan, who was the Speaker of the House at the time.”
That letter to Comey is, of course, one of the more compelling parts of all this. It was a useful bit of paper trail that would appear to justify an investigation into the Trump campaign and maybe even retroactively justify the (we know now) possibly illegally obtained FISA warrants themselves.
And, if you read the American Greatness piece all the way through, the question is less a timeline question of when Reid and the Gang of Eight were briefed and more a question of what Brennan told Reid. Specifically, if it was different from what he says he told other members of the Gang of Eight.
Here’s what Brennan told Congress:
“Again, in consultation with the White House, I personally briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to congressional leadership,” Brennan wrote. “I provided the same briefing to each Gang of Eight member. Given the highly sensitive nature of what was in what was an active counterintelligence case, involving an ongoing Russian effort, to interfere in our presidential election, the full details of what we knew at the time were shared only with those members of congress; each of whom was accompanied by one senior staff member.”
Why was Harry getting different information and did Brennan lie about it? Nunes seems to be saying he thinks that just might be the case.
Of course, As Victor David Hanson has pointed out, Brennan lying to Congress has become almost par for the course:
In 2011, Brennan, then the country’s chief counterterrorism adviser, had sworn to Congress that scores of drones strikes abroad had not killed a single noncombatant — at a time when both the president and the CIA were both receiving numerous reports of civilian collateral deaths.
In 2014, John Brennan, now as CIA director, lied emphatically that the CIA had not illegally accessed the computers of U.S. Senate staffers who were then exploring a CIA role in torturing detainees. Or as he told Andrea Mitchell: “As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. . . . We wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we do.” Brennan’s chronic deceptions drew the ire of a number of liberal senators, some of whom echoed the Washington Post’s call for his immediate resignation. After months of prevarications, but only upon release of the CIA inspector general’s report, Brennan apologized to the senators he had deceived.
Brennan, in May 2017, as an ex-CIA director, again almost certainly did not tell the truth to Congress when he testified in answer to Representative Trey Gowdy’s questions that he neither knew who had commissioned the Steele dossier nor had the CIA relied on its contents for any action. Yet both the retired National Security Agency director, Michael Rogers, and the former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, have conceded that the Steele dossier — along with the knowledge that it was a Clinton-campaign-funded product — most certainly did help shape the Obama’s intelligence communality interagency assessments and actions, often under the urging of Brennan himself.
There are also numerous reports that, despite his denials about knowledge of the dossier, Brennan served as a stealthy conduit to ensure that it was disseminated widely, at least in the sense of meeting in August 2016 with Senator Harry Reid to brief the senator about its unverified contents in hopes that he would pressure the FBI to further its investigations, which Reid did in a call two days later to James Comey.
The blame game continues but at some point the finger will land somewhere and on someone as the puller of puppet strings. As Brennan’s role comes more into focus, he’s becoming much easier to find behind the curtain.
QUOTE="Nonononono, post: 280513, member: 2987"
I've known Jeff for fifteen years.
Terrific guy.
He's a lot of fun to be with.
It is even said that he likes beautiful women
as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.
A quote from then Citizen Trump....now what.
/QUOTE
You should post quotes from the then 17 year old " individuals " who
are NOW splaying open William Jefferson Clinton and others with
the TRUTH about what went on at Jeffery Epsein's " Pedo Island....
When you face reality and fess up to even what the character you
love to portray ( Tony Clifton aka Bob Zmuda ) and the very very
questionable relationships he/YOU had with ( on the younger side ) " women "...
The Industry you dallied about in is full of VERY questionable interactions....
You are the epitome of a Hypocrite.....YES YOU ARE !
Clean your own Nose/Closet before attacking the POTUS with
VERY FALSE accusations....!!!
Just the suggested " Optics " you like to portray
are hypocritical to the stance you take against
America's 45th President...!
All the Very Filthy posts you thought were soooo
cute at the time are the epitome of Your Disgusting
Hypocrisy...!
I've known Jeff for fifteen years.
Terrific guy.
He's a lot of fun to be with.
It is even said that he likes beautiful women
as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.
A quote from then Citizen Trump....now what.
/QUOTE
You should post quotes from the then 17 year old " individuals " who
are NOW splaying open William Jefferson Clinton and others with
the TRUTH about what went on at Jeffery Epsein's " Pedo Island....
When you face reality and fess up to even what the character you
love to portray ( Tony Clifton aka Bob Zmuda ) and the very very
questionable relationships he/YOU had with ( on the younger side ) " women "...
The Industry you dallied about in is full of VERY questionable interactions....
You are the epitome of a Hypocrite.....YES YOU ARE !
Clean your own Nose/Closet before attacking the POTUS with
VERY FALSE accusations....!!!
Just the suggested " Optics " you like to portray
are hypocritical to the stance you take against
America's 45th President...!
All the Very Filthy posts you thought were soooo
cute at the time are the epitome of Your Disgusting
Hypocrisy...!
Sheriff Joe
DA
I know the answer, but he, like you, want to try and show us how smart you are, not working.