|
Post by Ratty on Apr 11, 2019 21:28:59 GMT
Perhaps Russian climate scientists need some grants. I think it is to assist the watermelons in USA Look Look even Russia has signed COP21 More Russian environmental pressure on the US. Meanwhile .....
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 12, 2019 17:59:22 GMT
Popcorn, widescreen TV and deep fallout shelter prices just spiked...... "[Steve Bannon] warned that the run-up to the 2020 election would be 'the most vitriolic year in American politics since before the Civil War'.
'And I include Vietnam in that. I think we're in, I think we're in for a very nasty 2019,' he said in an interview on CBS' 'Face the Nation'.
Bannon's comments come weeks after he warned that Trump will 'go full animal' on his political opponents after Robert Mueller's investigation found his campaign did not collude with Russia.
Trump's former policy adviser said the President will 'come off the chains' and use the findings to 'bludgeon' his adversaries in the lead-up to the 2020 election.
Bannon also believes Trump will use Mueller's report to neuter all ongoing investigations in Congress, and says they should be considered dead in the water.
'When I saw no new indictments — I thought, Oh my God!,' "www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6915615/Steve-Bannon-claims-Donald-Trump-payback-mode-elected.htmlThis could be a good spectator sport
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 13, 2019 17:27:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Apr 13, 2019 23:56:42 GMT
Excellent wedge?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 14, 2019 1:48:30 GMT
It is really entertaining watching the Democrats squirming - talk about hoist on their own petard.
NIMBY your name is Democrat
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Apr 14, 2019 17:49:53 GMT
It is really entertaining watching the Democrats squirming - talk about hoist on their own petard. NIMBY your name is Democrat They will be staging celebrations to welcome the convoys of ICE vans no doubt. Yes? After all, that IS what their supporters WOULD WISH FOR, YES?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 15, 2019 1:30:06 GMT
Well, Cher changed her mind.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Apr 15, 2019 3:27:37 GMT
Well, Cher changed her mind. Yes, and isn't that incredibly ridiculous? Trump should do it. He is never going to win any SF delegates anyway.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 15, 2019 3:38:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 18, 2019 19:24:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 18, 2019 19:36:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Apr 18, 2019 22:43:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Apr 19, 2019 18:23:56 GMT
The deeper I get into the obstruction section of Mueller's report, the clearer it becomes that this is nothing but a progressive hit piece on the President. First, the takeaway by many that Mueller didn't exonerate the President completely twists the role of a prosecutor into a pretzel. Prosecutors don't investigate to exonerate--they investigate to prosecute. Under our justice system (or the system that exists for everyone but conservatives) that target of an investigation is innocent until a prosecution is begun, and they are found guilty of a crime. If, after due investigation, the prosecutor decides not to prosecute, that's the end of the inquiry. In most cases if a prosecutor decides not to prosecute the target, for whatever reason, no one should get a peak at the evidence the prosecutor considered, for the simple reason that it could be used to smear someone the law considers innocent. Here, Mueller, like Comey before him in the HRH email probe, says "no prosecution," and then proceeds, IN PUBLIC, to smear the target with all sorts of information that, because it's not prosecutable, should not be in the public eye. This is an outrage, in my mind, especially since here, there is -0- evidence of an underlying crime that could trigger obstruction. In short, the Mueller report is an egregious example of the power of federal prosecutors in general, and special prosecutors in particular, to destroy careers, lives and reputations, even though no crime has been committed by the target. I weep for the future of our Republic.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Apr 19, 2019 23:49:31 GMT
Indeed and what appears to be standard practice for the Fabricate Bully and Intimidate
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Apr 20, 2019 6:07:01 GMT
The deeper I get into the obstruction section of Mueller's report, the clearer it becomes that this is nothing but a progressive hit piece on the President. First, the takeaway by many that Mueller didn't exonerate the President completely twists the role of a prosecutor into a pretzel. Prosecutors don't investigate to exonerate--they investigate to prosecute. Under our justice system (or the system that exists for everyone but conservatives) that target of an investigation is innocent until a prosecution is begun, and they are found guilty of a crime. If, after due investigation, the prosecutor decides not to prosecute, that's the end of the inquiry. In most cases if a prosecutor decides not to prosecute the target, for whatever reason, no one should get a peak at the evidence the prosecutor considered, for the simple reason that it could be used to smear someone the law considers innocent. Here, Mueller, like Comey before him in the HRH email probe, says "no prosecution," and then proceeds, IN PUBLIC, to smear the target with all sorts of information that, because it's not prosecutable, should not be in the public eye. This is an outrage, in my mind, especially since here, there is -0- evidence of an underlying crime that could trigger obstruction. In short, the Mueller report is an egregious example of the power of federal prosecutors in general, and special prosecutors in particular, to destroy careers, lives and reputations, even though no crime has been committed by the target. I weep for the future of our Republic. Excellent summation, Fido. You should take this exam.
|
|