ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

Turtledove wrote:

Xav, the point that you and Boem both keep missing is that Mueller was charged with looking into more than what the Barr Letter directly responded to. It is just another example as to why the full report needs to be made public.

I'm not really missing that part.

I'm just not interested in talking about those points as long as we don't have conclusive data.

I don't have an issue with saying "i don't know" when data is not yet released.
I assume the data will get released given the social pressure and at that point i am sure we can talk about those other charges based in relation to the report?

But currently i see collusion being off the table and obstruction in relation to that collusion also of the table.(i assume one cannot obstruct something that did not take place/or be interested in doing so)

You can fault that logic but i don't really see an issue with that thought pattern.

Harassing some people via twitter and other public sources doesn't mean obstruction in the legal sense as far as i am aware.(this seems to be something a lot of people point to when it comes to the "obstruction" charge for some weird reason?)

Again, refering to obstruction in relation to the collusion.

I am not familiar with other obstruction charges and cases but i guess that will change when the document is released and i take some time to look into it.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Xavderion wrote:

CNN is a conspiracy site, I wouldn't believe anything they write.

Yes, you like getting your news off of social media. Understood.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

CNN is a conspiracy site, I wouldn't believe anything they write.

Yes, you like getting your news off of social media. Understood.

That's funny because with regards to the Russia conspiracy theory even a lunatic like Q was way more correct than CNN. It should make you think (but it probably won't).

"

Boem wrote:

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

You bassicaly just said the party trump represents has no policy.

And what party would that be? He's been hopping between political parties like a hooker hopping between hotel rooms. Do you really think that he always represented his party's policy? Hahaha.

Of course not, that's how a political system works? you have teams with oposing ideology's and make concesions between the two to get stuff done.

Else it's called a dictatorship.

Your saying that like previous presidents didn't do exactly the same to get some of their campaign stuff done.

So you're telling me Trump's policy was always the same and only now that he's the president the party's policy is exactly the same as his? Man, you're just grasping straws at this point...

"

Boem wrote:

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

And that all his successes are obama after effects and then sarcastically proceed this behavior is what the "trumpets"(derogatory slang) will do in the future.

No. Trumpets will claim glory for his presidential season, and are unlikely to claim en masse that the following president's achievements are due to Trump. If anything, they'll probably claim that the next president is ruining everything good Trump has done.

What if they don't?

Regardless of whether they do or don't, it makes little difference in the big picture.

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

So you're telling me Trump's policy was always the same and only now that he's the president the party's policy is exactly the same as his? Man, you're just grasping straws at this point...

Uhm no that's not what i am saying.

A political party is a representation of the people with certain ideological inclinations and the dual party system exist's to have opposition to a single ideology becomming too dominant.

No single president i know of has sticked to the pure ideology of the party he represents.
Which is normal, you would get roadblocked when you do that.

Your statement was "trump flip flops between party's ideology"

My statement is simply "yes and so has every past president"

That's just part of the function if you actually want to get some important things done.(important things in this context are usually promised changes to the public in the campain, not regular legislation)

The roadblock for the wall is a case like that because it would give trump a "campaign" win as well as being ideological opposed, so a united front is formed against that from the opposition.

There is usually much less unity which allows nuance in legislation.(from both camps, there isn't one uniform mentality within a party)

Peace,

-Boem-

Hoping that now this national nightmare is winding down, Trump can actually do some of the things he campaigned on (of course he will be obstructed every step but we knew that would happen anyway).

I would LOVE to see the total end of ACA, for one thing. I have had clients whose lives were literally ruined from this piece of garbage legislation. It should never have been put in place. The idea that someone who makes 60K a year and has 2 kids can afford to pay 2k per month is absurd. I guess the morons think everyone has low rent/mortgage or some fantasy.

It would be nice if Congress would address immigration reform but those clowns won't do a damned thing no matter who is Prez.

"

Boem wrote:

i assume one cannot obstruct something that did not take place/or be interested in doing so

The obstruction of an investigation has nothing to do with the results of the investigation. It's like how lying to the police is a crime. It doesn't matter the reason you are lying, you are wasting their time and resources.

"

MrCoo1 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

i assume one cannot obstruct something that did not take place/or be interested in doing so

The obstruction of an investigation has nothing to do with the results of the investigation.

Wrong. It's hard to prove intent with regards to obstruction when the guy who allegedly obstructed is innocent of the actual crime.

"

kolyaboo wrote:

Hoping that now this national nightmare is winding down, Trump can actually do some of the things he campaigned on (of course he will be obstructed every step but we knew that would happen anyway).

I would LOVE to see the total end of ACA, for one thing. I have had clients whose lives were literally ruined from this piece of garbage legislation. It should never have been put in place. The idea that someone who makes 60K a year and has 2 kids can afford to pay 2k per month is absurd. I guess the morons think everyone has low rent/mortgage or some fantasy.

It would be nice if Congress would address immigration reform but those clowns won't do a damned thing no matter who is Prez.

We'll see how it goes. This is the one big thing he didn't deliver on yet and I really hope he does.

"

MrCoo1 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

i assume one cannot obstruct something that did not take place/or be interested in doing so

The obstruction of an investigation has nothing to do with the results of the investigation. It's like how lying to the police is a crime. It doesn't matter the reason you are lying, you are wasting their time and resources.

So every reported crime in good faith suddenly becomes a punishable offense?

Keep in mind, i am laying a trap here and i hope you realise that.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : perhaps an off-topic statement.

Where i live first-rank family members cannot be held accountable for lying about a family member if they are punished for a crime and sought after by the state.

The law makes specific exceptions where i live around this, since it fully realizes there is nuance in lying to the authorities and priorities are not evenly distributed.