New Reality: Lying Pols Should Be Prosecuted

[Kathianne]

I and many others, really do NOT want Trump as President again. IMO, he's very bad for the country. That doesn't change the reality of his persecution by weaponized DOJ, truth is, what happens now will be seen again:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-unprecedented-jack-smith-special-counsel-donald-trump-president-fraud-c076a2ee?st=t7ccx07vwynbexl&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink


OPINIONPOTOMAC WATCH
The Unprecedented Jack Smith
If lying politicians can be prosecuted for ‘fraud,’ as he proposes in the Trump indictment, we’ll need a lot of new prisons. By
Kimberley A. Strassel Aug. 3, 2023 6:32 pm ET

If there’s one word to describe what everyone might wish Washington would stop producing, it’s “unprecedented.” Yet here we go again, with special counsel Jack Smith’s unprecedented indictment of a politician for engaging in “a conspiracy to defraud the United States.” Be prepared for this new and startlingly elastic precedent to ensnare plenty of others.


Donald Trump Faces His Third Criminal Arraignment


That’s the biggest problem with Mr. Smith’s latest broadside against Donald Trump, on top of its untested legal theories and evidence of a Justice Department double standard. As former Attorney General William Barr told CNN on Wednesday, “there were reasons not to bring” the case, and among them is “the slippery slope of criminalizing legitimate political activity.”


Take Mr. Trump out of the equation and consider more broadly what even the New York Times calls Mr. Smith’s “novel approach.” A politician can lie to the public, Mr. Smith concedes. Yet if that politician is advised by others that his comments are untruthful and nonetheless uses them to justify acts that undermine government “function,” he is guilty of a conspiracy to defraud the country. Dishonest politicians who act on dubious legal claims? There aren’t enough prisons to hold them all.


Consider how many politicians might already be doing time had prosecutors applied this standard earlier. Both Al Gore and George W. Bush filed lawsuits in the 2000 election that contained bold if untested legal claims. Surely both candidates had advisers who told them privately that they may have legitimately lost—and neither publicly conceded an inch until the Supreme Court resolved the matter. Might an ultimate sore winner have used this approach to indict the loser for attempting to thwart the democratic process?


And why limit the theory to election claims? In 2014 the justices held unanimously that President Barack Obama had violated the Constitution by decreeing that the Senate was in recess so that he could install several appointees without confirmation. It was an outrageous move, one that Mr. Obama’s legal counselors certainly warned was a loser, yet the White House vocally insisted the president had total “constitutional authority” to do it. Under Mr. Smith’s standard, that was a lie that Mr. Obama used to defraud the public by jerry-rigging the function of a labor board with illegal appointments.


What’s the betting someone told President Biden he didn’t have the power to erase $430 billion in student loan debt. Oh, wait! That’s right. He told himself. “I don’t think I have the authority to do it by signing with a pen,” he said in 2021. The House speaker advised him it was illegal: “People think that the president of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not,” Nancy Pelosi said. Yet Mr. Biden later adopted the lie that he did, and took action to defraud taxpayers by obstructing the federal function of loan processing—until the Supreme Court made him stop.


If even a former president can be hit with conspiracy charges, what’s to protect a mere congressman, or a failed candidate, or a consultant? For how long did Stacey Abrams falsely dispute her loss in the 2018 Georgia governor’s race and pressure Georgia lawmakers to alter election procedures in ways that might undermine voting integrity on the basis of untruths? Would the advisers who egged her on in that pursuit qualify as co-conspirators, like the lawyers in Mr. Smith’s indictment?


The press is rooting for the special counsel to go after Republican lawmakers who on the basis of Mr. Trump’s claims objected to slates of electors on Jan. 6, 2021. Let’s line them all up, including dozens of Democrats who objected to slates in 2001, 2005 and 2017—on the basis of lies and with the purpose of conspiring to obstruct (as the Smith indictment puts it) “the lawful federal government function by which the results of the presidential election are collected, counted, and certified.”


We now know that Rep. Adam Schiff looked at a classified surveillance warrant application against a Trump adviser, lied about its contents publicly, memorialized those lies in an official memo, and used it to help gin up an investigation that definitely impeded the function of the Trump administration. We have evidence that the Federal Bureau of Investigation officials behind that application—James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok—used a dossier full of lies to get that warrant. Fortunately for them, special counsel John Durham chose not to take a flyer by indicting them for conspiracy.


Smith fans will say this is a special case, the “big” lie, a one-time necessity for justice. Yet once a bar is lowered, it will be lowered further. Remember when impeachments, special committees, the stripping of committee assignments, and contempt citations were rare? Of course future prosecutors will take this precedent and expand it in ever more novel ways.


There are any number of things as certain as death and taxes. One is that politicians will lie, and act on those untruths. Now that might make them felons.

[Black Diamond]

Is there a tape anywhere of biden telling them to look into trump ?

I feel like someone was impeached for something like that.

[Gunny]

I and many others, really do NOT want Trump as President again. IMO, he's very bad for the country. That doesn't change the reality of his persecution by weaponized DOJ, truth is, what happens now will be seen again:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-unprecedented-jack-smith-special-counsel-donald-trump-president-fraud-c076a2ee?st=t7ccx07vwynbexl&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalinkI agree with the author's conclusions. This moves the goal posts.

Trump of course has already asked the Supreme Court to intercede. This is a nightmare perfect storm. A weaponized, partisan DOJ on one side and an egomaniacal crackpot willing to burn down the entire democratic process to get his way.

Trump is already under indictment for real crimes that from all appearances (meaning: minus politics) are a slam dunk for prosecutors. This obviously partisan bullshit is not only unnecessary, but is opening a can of worms I doubt what's left of our democracy can survive.

[Gunny]

https://www.foxnews.com/media/bill-barr-calls-dojs-two-standards-aggressive-move-trump-lenient-treatment-hunter

[icansayit]

According to the 1ST Amendment of our Constitution.
Anyone who tells any form of LIE, is permitted to do so because:
FREEDOM OF SPEECH also includes LIES, OPINIONS, and IDEA'S.

Politicians, as well as Police officers are protected by...Qualified Immunity.
The Supreme Court Has Said So TOO!
https://ewscripps.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/ab0dd0b/2147483647/strip/true/crop/940x788+0+0/resize/940x788!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fewscripps-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2F50%2F08%2F098f2b2548 e89e07f40ba31944eb%2Fq2.jpg

[AHZ]

I and many others, really do NOT want Trump as President again. IMO, he's very bad for the country. That doesn't change the reality of his persecution by weaponized DOJ, truth is, what happens now will be seen again:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-unprecedented-jack-smith-special-counsel-donald-trump-president-fraud-c076a2ee?st=t7ccx07vwynbexl&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink


we know.

now look what you "fence sitter" intellectuals have wrought.


when you're consistently for the authoritarian elite, even in subtle ways, this is where it leads.

[Kathianne]

we know.

now look what you "fence sitter" intellectuals have wrought.


when you're consistently for the authoritarian elite, even in subtle ways, this is where it leads.

and making gods of corrupt men is why we are where you condemn. Obama by the left, Trump by the right, both led to Biden. Proud of your part of this mess?

[AHZ]

and making gods of corrupt men is why we are where you condemn. Obama by the left, Trump by the right, both led to Biden. Proud of your part of this mess?


I disagree with your assessment.

i joke with trump god emperor photos and such.

but my adoration of him is purely based on issues, and mostly one issue.

I won't go into that issue now.

the left is clearly worse on promoting totalitarianism.



i'd rather stand for something than for nothing.

standing for "the middle" is just a pointless geometric exercise with no meaning, ultimately favoring the establishment in practice.

[Gunny]

I disagree with your assessment.

i joke with trump god emperor photos and such.

but my adoration of him is purely based on issues, and mostly one issue.

I won't go into that issue now.

the left is clearly worse on promoting totalitarianism.



i'd rather stand for something than for nothing.

standing for "the middle" is just a pointless geometric exercise with no meaning, ultimately favoring the establishment in practice.

Not "standing" on what YOU choose to stand for is NOT standing for nothing. You have yet to, in all your pointless ramblings and trollings, present a single, legitimate argument.

What is discernable to even the casual observer is your love for hearing your tongue rattle against the roof of your mouth; which, coincidentally, is the same damned problem your idol has.

Grow up. Both of you:rolleyes:

[AHZ]

Not "standing" on what YOU choose to stand for is NOT standing for nothing. You have yet to, in all your pointless ramblings and trollings, present a single, legitimate argument.

What is discernable to even the casual observer is your love for hearing your tongue rattle against the roof of your mouth; which, coincidentally, is the same damned problem your idol has.

Grow up. Both of you:rolleyes:

I disagree with your assement.

Put more accutately, I don't do busy work for people who demand links as a stalling tactic without even stating their own position definitively.

[Gunny]

I disagree with your assement.

Put more accutately, I don't do busy work for people who demand links as a stalling tactic without even stating their own position definitively.

You don't back up your arguments because you are intellectually lazy and have no real base to them. "Just because I said so ..." works for neither you nor your boy.

[AHZ]

You don't back up your arguments because you are intellectually lazy and have no real base to them. "Just because I said so ..." works for neither you nor your boy.


I back up as needed.

All my bases are real.

what do you want?

job losses due to globalization?


you want that? will it change your mind?

[Gunny]

I back up as needed.

All my bases are real.

what do you want?

job losses due to globalization?


you want that? will it change your mind?I want them to prosecute Trump correctly, by law for his real crimes and drop this BS that is a threat to the Constitution and democracy. They can rightly bury his ass on the classified material and fake electors. Self-inflicted wounds.

[AHZ]

I want them to prosecute Trump correctly, by law for his real crimes and drop this BS that is a threat to the Constitution and democracy. They can rightly bury his ass on the classified material and fake electors. Self-inflicted wounds.


the whole charade is a hoax, prosecuting trump properly is already impossible.

so what now, fall back and fear the dems?

no thanks.

[Gunny]

the whole charade is a hoax, prosecuting trump properly is already impossible.

so what now, fall back and fear the dems?

no thanks.He has committed real crimes that are punishable by law with more than plenty of us "mere mortals" doing time as proof of that fact.

He isn't excused by, nor above the law because he's Trump. That's what you and he think. Like you, he is more trouble than he is worth and is currently a bigger threat to (read the OP) the Constitution than any dems. He missed his bet being a Dem. They'd love him if he was and he'd fit right in with their above the law bullshit.

[AHZ]

He has committed real crimes that are punishable by law with more than plenty of us "mere mortals" doing time as proof of that fact.

He isn't excused by, nor above the law because he's Trump. That's what you and he think. Like you, he is more trouble than he is worth and is currently a bigger threat to (read the OP) the Constitution than any dems. He missed his bet being a Dem. They'd love him if he was and he'd fit right in with their above the law bullshit.


no. i think the president has very powerful declass powers, and the law agrees. these charges are bogus, a charade, a farce, the epitome of dimwittery and nonsense.

https://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/c_limit,w_680/f_auto,fl_lossy,pg_1,q_auto/bmvrpogemy6icfcpimti.jpg

[AHZ]

The prosecution is entirly illegitimate.

it's entirely political. there is no precedent for anything like this.

the legal system works on precedence.

precedence for the presidents.

[Gunny]

no. i think the president has very powerful declass powers, and the law agrees. these charges are bogus, a charade, a farce, the epitome of dimwittery and nonsense.

https://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/c_limit,w_680/f_auto,fl_lossy,pg_1,q_auto/bmvrpogemy6icfcpimti.jpg

You "think". I KNOW. He does not have the power to declassify anything he wants by waving his hand over it. Especially after he's out of office. You've tried this argument before and got buried that time too.

[AHZ]

You "think". I KNOW. He does not have the power to declassify anything he wants by waving his hand over it. Especially after he's out of office. You've tried this argument before and got buried that time too.
basically yes. it could be interpreted as such, I believe.

I can have a different belief than you.

this is why we have trials and not just immediate tyranny.

[icansayit]

You "think". I KNOW. He does not have the power to declassify anything he wants by waving his hand over it. Especially after he's out of office. You've tried this argument before and got buried that time too.


Trump, as president DID have the power to classify, or declassify whatever he thought, needed to be classified, or declassified.
And that APPLIES to EVERYTHING he had as president, and after leaving office.
He did not break any laws, as many want to insist. He was rightfully within his powers at the time, just like every other
former president WHO HAS THEIR OWN LIBRARY full of FORMERLY classified papers, and documents.

The reasons I can say this is...because While I was in the Navy, and handling Highly classified, and Unclassified
documents from around the World (literally for almost 20 years). It is written that WHOEVER created, used, drafted
any document... Had the sole responsibility to CLASSIFY until they decided to DECLASSIFY.
That's not My Opinion. That is PURE FACT.
As a senior Radioman. I also was a Custodian of Classified Materials in every Command I served in.
MY LIFE, and CAREER depended on my faithfulness to our nation, as well as my NEED to never
become a permanent resident of LEAVENWORTH.

[Gunny]

Trump, as president DID have the power to classify, or declassify whatever he thought, needed to be classified, or declassified.
And that APPLIES to EVERYTHING he had as president, and after leaving office.
He did not break any laws, as many want to insist. He was rightfully within his powers at the time, just like every other
former president WHO HAS THEIR OWN LIBRARY full of FORMERLY classified papers, and documents.

The reasons I can say this is...because While I was in the Navy, and handling Highly classified, and Unclassified
documents from around the World (literally for almost 20 years). It is written that WHOEVER created, used, drafted
any document... Had the sole responsibility to CLASSIFY until they decided to DECLASSIFY.
That's not My Opinion. That is PURE FACT.
As a senior Radioman. I also was a Custodian of Classified Materials in every Command I served in.
MY LIFE, and CAREER depended on my faithfulness to our nation, as well as my NEED to never
become a permanent resident of LEAVENWORTH.I find it interesting you and I both had clearances; yet, disagree on this. You contradict your own words:


It is written that WHOEVER created, used, drafted
any document... Had the sole responsibility to CLASSIFY until they decided to DECLASSIFY.

I completely agree that statement is correct. Emphasis on whoever created, used, drafted ... has the sole responsibility ...

Any classified document in his possession that he is not the creator, drafter and user of falls outside his purview and must be returned to the originator for declassification. It must also be signed off on by anyone that originated any classified information subcontained. Once it has cleared that, then been approved by the usual every Tom, Dick and Harry with a rubber stamp, it can be declassified. Still not by the President; rather, at the request of.

The President of the United States is still bound by law to handle, disseminate/discuss and/or dispose of classified material IAW the law. Even by your interpretation, the President can solely declassify only information he has classified.

I also was CMCC and had the misfortune of having to declassify info stuck in the "company safe" that date back to the Korean war. That sucked.

[AHZ]

I find it interesting you and I both had clearances; yet, disagree on this. You contradict your own words:



I completely agree that statement is correct. Emphasis on whoever created, used, drafted ... has the sole responsibility ...

Any classified document in his possession that he is not the creator, drafter and user of falls outside his purview and must be returned to the originator for declassification. It must also be signed off on by anyone that originated any classified information subcontained. Once it has cleared that, then been approved by the usual every Tom, Dick and Harry with a rubber stamp, it can be declassified. Still not by the President; rather, at the request of.

The President of the United States is still bound by law to handle, disseminate/discuss and/or dispose of classified material IAW the law. Even by your interpretation, the President can solely declassify only information he has classified.

he was a user.

[Gunny]

he was a user.Thanks for reinforcing my point. You really should stay out of topics so far over your head you can't do anything but jump at bootlaces of the adults talking.

[Gunny]

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-XII/subchapter-D/part-1260

[AHZ]

Thanks for reinforcing my point. You really should stay out of topics so far over your head you can't do anything but jump at bootlaces of the adults talking.

My comment stands.

this case is meritless.

Implied declassification is an age old legal construct.

[Gunny]

My comment stands.

this case is meritless.

Implied declassification is an age old legal construct.
The law's right there where I posted it. It says you are wrong. Argue with it.

[AHZ]

The law's right there where I posted it. It says you are wrong. Argue with it.


It says I won.

[icansayit]

I find it interesting you and I both had clearances; yet, disagree on this. You contradict your own words:



I completely agree that statement is correct. Emphasis on whoever created, used, drafted ... has the sole responsibility ...

Any classified document in his possession that he is not the creator, drafter and user of falls outside his purview and must be returned to the originator for declassification. It must also be signed off on by anyone that originated any classified information subcontained. Once it has cleared that, then been approved by the usual every Tom, Dick and Harry with a rubber stamp, it can be declassified. Still not by the President; rather, at the request of.

The President of the United States is still bound by law to handle, disseminate/discuss and/or dispose of classified material IAW the law. Even by your interpretation, the President can solely declassify only information he has classified.

I also was CMCC and had the misfortune of having to declassify info stuck in the "company safe" that date back to the Korean war. That sucked.

If you feel that is how it is. Go for it. Then...we should all be prosecuting EVERY former, Senator, Congress member, and President for being in
possession of FORMERLY CLASSIFIED documents (THEY CREATED or DRAFTED).
Presidents continue...CONTINUE to have their TOP security clearances...FOR LIFE. So how can they steal something that RIGHTFULLY (BY LAW) Is Theirs???

[AHZ]

If you feel that is how it is. Go for it.

EPIC!



http://www.bloggingmets.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/rocky3goforit.jpg

:dance::dance::dance::dance::dance::dance:

[Gunny]

If you feel that is how it is. Go for it. Then...we should all be prosecuting EVERY former, Senator, Congress member, and President for being in
possession of FORMERLY CLASSIFIED documents (THEY CREATED or DRAFTED).
Presidents continue...CONTINUE to have their TOP security clearances...FOR LIFE. So how can they steal something that RIGHTFULLY (BY LAW) Is Theirs???

Has nothing to do with how I feel and I am not addressing "formerly classified" documents. Classified documents are not his (nor anyone's). They belong the US Government. Without the US Government's permission, taking the documents is unauthorized/unlawful possession.

IF Trump originated and his office the only one affected by the documents he took, then he has nothing to worry about. I suspect such is not the case.

As you know, your clearance and mine mean absolutely nothing "for life". If we were to need them again they would have to be updated, and even then we would be privy only to whatever compartmentalized information authority deemed necessary.

I posted the law above. You're arguing with it, not me.

[AHZ]

Has nothing to do with how I feel and I am not addressing "formerly classified" documents. Classified documents are not his (nor anyone's). They belong the US Government. Without the US Government's permission, taking the documents is unauthorized/unlawful possession.

IF Trump originated and his office the only one affected by the documents he took, then he has nothing to worry about. I suspect such is not the case.

As you know, your clearance and mine mean absolutely nothing "for life". If we were to need them again they would have to be updated, and even then we would be privy only to whatever compartmentalized information authority deemed necessary.

I posted the law above. You're arguing with it, not me.


as president he has permission.

[Gunny]

as president he has permission.As moderator, I not only have permission, but access to confine you to posting in the Steel Cage if you don't stop your incessant trolling. I could just ban you which is what the other two mods would have already done to you for your incessant trolling because they quite frankly just aren't going to tolerate your bullshit.

So maybe you ought to rethink your strategy about who you think you're fucking with and bring it up to at least high school level. If you can.

You're pissing off other members of the board which is where I draw the line and will squash you like a bug. You can feel free to cry to your Congressman about it on your own time, not mine.

[icansayit]

Has nothing to do with how I feel and I am not addressing "formerly classified" documents. Classified documents are not his (nor anyone's). They belong the US Government. Without the US Government's permission, taking the documents is unauthorized/unlawful possession.

IF Trump originated and his office the only one affected by the documents he took, then he has nothing to worry about. I suspect such is not the case.

As you know, your clearance and mine mean absolutely nothing "for life". If we were to need them again they would have to be updated, and even then we would be privy only to whatever compartmentalized information authority deemed necessary.

I posted the law above. You're arguing with it, not me.

I am not arguing. No matter what has been written since the Constitution. The 25th amendment, and the duties of the President are still Clear.
Some don't like it. Some even hate it. But EVERY President, past, present, and future IS...the One, and Only person who decides what Is, or Isn't
CLASSIFIED. And, has a Lifelong duty to determine if, and when any, or all classifications end, or begin.
All of those Boxes found at Mar a Lago...DID NOT all contain classified, or unclassified information. But the TRUMP Hater's
NEED THAT STORY TO BE TRUE. From what I have seen, and read. Even TRUMPS Golf Clubs, shirts, gloves, and shoes in those
boxes were...AS THE HATERS LIKE TO SAY....CLASSIFIED TOO!
So, Gunny we will agree to disagree here. I have no reason to make anything up, or fabricate
what I know to be true, even after all the years that have passed.
If you feel Only you must be right. GO FOR IT.

[Gunny]

I am not arguing. No matter what has been written since the Constitution. The 25th amendment, and the duties of the President are still Clear.
Some don't like it. Some even hate it. But EVERY President, past, present, and future IS...the One, and Only person who decides what Is, or Isn't
CLASSIFIED. And, has a Lifelong duty to determine if, and when any, or all classifications end, or begin.
All of those Boxes found at Mar a Lago...DID NOT all contain classified, or unclassified information. But the TRUMP Hater's
NEED THAT STORY TO BE TRUE. From what I have seen, and read. Even TRUMPS Golf Clubs, shirts, gloves, and shoes in those
boxes were...AS THE HATERS LIKE TO SAY....CLASSIFIED TOO!
So, Gunny we will agree to disagree here. I have no reason to make anything up, or fabricate
what I know to be true, even after all the years that have passed.
If you feel Only you must be right. GO FOR IT.

I see. This isn't about hating Trump. My opinion is and has been uniform when it comes to classified material. If Pvt Smith is getting 20 years, so should the President. It's about equal application of law.

I have not argued whether or not the President can classify or declassify whatever he wants. My argument is he has to follow procedure if and when he does, IAW the law, like everyone else. In that regard, Trump's advisors failed him, or he ignored them. Regardless, proper procedure was not followed IAW the law. THAT is my argument. Not who likes who, nor is it about me being right. I'm presenting the law, not my opinion.

Excerpt:
In all cases, however, a formal procedure is required so governmental agencies know with certainty what has been declassified and decisions memorialized. A federal appeals court in a 2020 Freedom of Information Act case, New York Times v. CIA, underscored that point: “Declassification cannot occur unless designated officials follow specified procedures,” the court said.

Complete article: https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2022/10/fact-check-presidential-authority/

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2010-title3-vol1/xml/CFR-2010-title3-vol1-eo13526.xml

Also noted, a sitting President can declassify documents. A former one cannot. Part of it at least is going to come down to "when" and "if".

[AHZ]

I see. This isn't about hating Trump. My opinion is and has been uniform when it comes to classified material. If Pvt Smith is getting 20 years, so should the President. It's about equal application of law.

I have not argued whether or not the President can classify or declassify whatever he wants. My argument is he has to follow procedure if and when he does, IAW the law, like everyone else. In that regard, Trump's advisors failed him, or he ignored them. Regardless, proper procedure was not followed IAW the law. THAT is my argument. Not who likes who, nor is it about me being right. I'm presenting the law, not my opinion.

Excerpt:

Complete article: https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2022/10/fact-check-presidential-authority/

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2010-title3-vol1/xml/CFR-2010-title3-vol1-eo13526.xml

presidents and privates are completely different under the law.

an article is not the law.

[Gunny]

presidents and privates are completely different under the law.

an article is not the law.The handling of classified material is not different under the law because of one's status.

[AHZ]

The handling of classified material is not different under the law because of one's status.
yes it is.

the president is special, even under the law.

That's why it's called the presidential records act.

[icansayit]

I love being constantly told how wrong I am, despite all the years of training.
Like everything else here. I don't know why I bother. Either I am wrong, or just ignored.

PEACE, OUT!

[AHZ]

I love being constantly told how wrong I am, despite all the years of training.
Like everything else here. I don't know why I bother. Either I am wrong, or just ignored.

PEACE, OUT!
please stay and help repel the rising tide of stupidity and igorance.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I love being constantly told how wrong I am, despite all the years of training.
Like everything else here. I don't know why I bother. Either I am wrong, or just ignored.

PEACE, OUT!
My friend, you know what your training told you. So who cares what others say.
Stay with your opinion and just let others be wrong in theirs. Politics is like that everybody has an opinion.
I read your posts, always have. Appreciate your input, always have. God bless...--Tyr

[AHZ]

My friend, you know what your training told you. So who cares what others say.
Stay with your opinion and just let others be wrong in theirs. Politics is like that everybody has an opinion.
I read your posts, always have. Appreciate you input, always have. God bless...--Tyr
we have to care what others say when others are law enforcement completely fabricating law for corrupt purposes.


You cannot just hope to be left alone.

they are coming for you.

trump is just in the way.

[icansayit]

please stay and help repel the rising tide of stupidity and igorance.

https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.512222639.8357/st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.u5.jpg

[Gunny]

https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.512222639.8357/st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.u5.jpg

What I was thinking:rolleyes:

[BoogyMan]

As it stands the hate that has been ramped up in DC over all of this mess has assured us of many more years of misery from investigation after investigation after investigation with our tax dollars being burned for the delight of the party in power.

The leftists right now seem to be operating under the assumption that they will never lose another election.

If they ever do, it will be open season with political retribution on the docket ahead of the needs of the country.

Our governance is broken.


I agree with the author's conclusions. This moves the goal posts.

Trump of course has already asked the Supreme Court to intercede. This is a nightmare perfect storm. A weaponized, partisan DOJ on one side and an egomaniacal crackpot willing to burn down the entire democratic process to get his way.

Trump is already under indictment for real crimes that from all appearances (meaning: minus politics) are a slam dunk for prosecutors. This obviously partisan bullshit is not only unnecessary, but is opening a can of worms I doubt what's left of our democracy can survive.

[icansayit]

As it stands the hate that has been ramped up in DC over all of this mess has assured us of many more years of misery from investigation after investigation after investigation with our tax dollars being burned for the delight of the party in power.

The leftists right now seem to be operating under the assumption that they will never lose another election.

If they ever do, it will be open season with political retribution on the docket ahead of the needs of the country.

Our governance is broken.

It seems, everyone has forgotten how their own rights...according to the 1st amendment...also apply to
Donald Trump. As a former President. He is now the same as all of us. A citizen, and able to legally do whatever
the constitution says. As in the 1st amendment..."The Right To Redress His Grievances To Government".
Though he is a Billionaire. He is Presently A PRIVATE CITIZEN. No matter who hates him, or calls him all of
the repeated names...most of the Naysayers...are ALSO, (Allegedly) labeled.
THAT IS WHAT PISSES THE TRUMP HATERS OFF SO MUCH.
They hate the Constitution they are trying to use against him, While He Legally Can Do So...no matter how the Radicals FEEL...BOO HOO!

[BoogyMan]

I have to admit, I am no Trump fan, but what is being done to him is wrong. Until that is dealt with I don't know how things ever go back to some semblance of normalcy.

The hate that the machine in DC ramped up from 2015 onward to today isn't going to just go away, and the politicos there have long memories.


It seems, everyone has forgotten how their own rights...according to the 1st amendment...also apply to
Donald Trump. As a former President. He is now the same as all of us. A citizen, and able to legally do whatever
the constitution says. As in the 1st amendment..."The Right To Redress His Grievances To Government".
Though he is a Billionaire. He is Presently A PRIVATE CITIZEN. No matter who hates him, or calls him all of
the repeated names...most of the Naysayers...are ALSO, (Allegedly) labeled.
THAT IS WHAT PISSES THE TRUMP HATERS OFF SO MUCH.
They hate the Constitution they are trying to use against him, While He Legally Can Do So...no matter how the Radicals FEEL...BOO HOO!

[AHZ]

I have to admit, I am no Trump fan, but what is being done to him is wrong. Until that is dealt with I don't know how things ever go back to some semblance of normalcy.

The hate that the machine in DC ramped up from 2015 onward to today isn't going to just go away, and the politicos there have long memories.
it is going to go away.

evil will not stand.

not on our watch.