(12-12-2019 03:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 02:49 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(12-11-2019 08:10 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-11-2019 08:03 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  ... or are they?

They are not billing me. I thought it was a free seminar.

Very impressed with the engineer holding his own with the two legal eagles.

A friend on mine used to say, if you cannot be right, be stubborn.

Similarly, an old adage of courtroom advocacy is:
If you've got the facts on your side, pound the facts;
if you've got the law on your side, pound the law;
if you've got neither, pound the table.

I thought it was 'scream and pound the table'.

Maybe in California :)

(12-12-2019 03:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 02:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 02:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 12:22 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I believe the FISA issues were solely related to Carter Page.

I am not a legal expert like Lad, Tanq, and Numbers, but the phrase that keeps going through me head is "fruit of the poisoned tree".

I believe the FISA application for Page was separate from opening the investigation into the Trump campaign. Not sure how the information captured from that surveillance influenced future aspects of the Trump campaign case, or the three other cases.

But that's a very valid point regarding the reasons the FISA misconduct is troubling - using an investigation that was supported with fraudulent evidence is pretty damning and more than irresponsible, especially given how sensitive the target was.

Carter Page served as an initial pretext for Obama's FBI to surveil the Trump campaign.

To that end they took out an initial FISA warrant on him on the basis of the Democratic-paid for Steele dossier; they renewed that warrant three times.

They found nothing on him.

In fact, the FBI in that pursuit suppressed exculpatory evidence (and seemingly manufactured evidence) to maintain the amazingly high level of surveillance on him, and by default, anyone he associated with.

Reading through the IG report, the initial pretext for the FBI to surveil the Trump campaign was Popodapolous - and the IG found that pretext to be sufficient. The report clearly states that Crossfire Hurricane, which was the investigation into coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia, was built on that Popodapolous meeting. Further, you can read about the rationale to turn Crossfire Hurricane into a full investigation, and none of them are the Page FISA app. Heck, the initial Page FISA app was not submitted until Oct 2016, and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on 31 July 2016.

So how exactly was a FISA warrant two months after an investigation into the campaign was started, an initial pretext to spy on the campaign?

The IG report tells us some nice timelines. On August 15th, The FBI’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) informed the Crossfire Hurricane team “there was an insufficient basis for them to proceed with a FISA application” for George Papadopoulos. (One of the functions of the OGC is to prepare applications for the FISA Court.) The Crossfire Hurricane team dropped the matter of the Papadopoulus FISA.

On August 15th, the same team requested assistance from OGC to prepare a FISA application for Carter Page.

Later in August, the team was told the OGC had consulted with the attorneys in the Office of Intelligence (OI) in the DOJ’s National Security Division (the OI prepares FISA applications and presents them to the FISA Court), there was insufficient information to establish probable cause (PC) for a warrant to spy on Page.

In other words, the team was shot down in getting Papadopoulos FISA-ed. The same day they ran back to the OGC with a request to FISA Page, which was also shot down. Then they reapply for the FISA with the altered items.



Funny, this is the same day that Strzok shot Page the telling "I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy's [McCabe's] office" and "[i]t's like an insurance policy" text.

(12-12-2019 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 02:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 02:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I am not a legal expert like Lad, Tanq, and Numbers, but the phrase that keeps going through me head is "fruit of the poisoned tree".

I believe the FISA application for Page was separate from opening the investigation into the Trump campaign. Not sure how the information captured from that surveillance influenced future aspects of the Trump campaign case, or the three other cases.

But that's a very valid point regarding the reasons the FISA misconduct is troubling - using an investigation that was supported with fraudulent evidence is pretty damning and more than irresponsible, especially given how sensitive the target was.

Carter Page served as an initial pretext for Obama's FBI to surveil the Trump campaign.

To that end they took out an initial FISA warrant on him on the basis of the Democratic-paid for Steele dossier; they renewed that warrant three times.

They found nothing on him.

In fact, the FBI in that pursuit suppressed exculpatory evidence (and seemingly manufactured evidence) to maintain the amazingly high level of surveillance on him, and by default, anyone he associated with.

Reading through the IG report, the initial pretext for the FBI to surveil the Trump campaign was Popodapolous - and the IG found that pretext to be sufficient. The report clearly states that Crossfire Hurricane, which was the investigation into coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia, was built on that Popodapolous meeting. Further, you can read about the rationale to turn Crossfire Hurricane into a full investigation, and none of them are the Page FISA app. Heck, the initial Page FISA app was not submitted until Oct 2016, and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on 31 July 2016.

So how exactly was a FISA warrant two months after an investigation into the campaign was started, an initial pretext to spy on the campaign?

The IG report tells us some nice timelines. On August 15th, The FBI’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) informed the Crossfire Hurricane team “there was an insufficient basis for them to proceed with a FISA application” for George Papadopoulos. (One of the functions of the OGC is to prepare applications for the FISA Court.) The Crossfire Hurricane team dropped the matter of the Papadopoulus FISA.

On August 15th, the same team requested assistance from OGC to prepare a FISA application for Carter Page.

Later in August, the team was told the OGC had consulted with the attorneys in the Office of Intelligence (OI) in the DOJ’s National Security Division (the OI prepares FISA applications and presents them to the FISA Court), there was insufficient information to establish probable cause (PC) for a warrant to spy on Page.

In other words, the team was shot down in getting Papadopoulos FISA-ed. The same day they ran back to the OGC with a request to FISA Page, which was also shot down. Then they reapply for the FISA with the altered items.



Funny, this is the same day that Strzok shot Page the telling "I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy's [McCabe's] office" and "[i]t's like an insurance policy" text.

Cool.

So we agree that the Page FISA app was not the initial pretext for opening an investigation into the Trump campaign?

(12-12-2019 04:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 02:06 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I believe the FISA application for Page was separate from opening the investigation into the Trump campaign. Not sure how the information captured from that surveillance influenced future aspects of the Trump campaign case, or the three other cases.

But that's a very valid point regarding the reasons the FISA misconduct is troubling - using an investigation that was supported with fraudulent evidence is pretty damning and more than irresponsible, especially given how sensitive the target was.

Carter Page served as an initial pretext for Obama's FBI to surveil the Trump campaign.

To that end they took out an initial FISA warrant on him on the basis of the Democratic-paid for Steele dossier; they renewed that warrant three times.

They found nothing on him.

In fact, the FBI in that pursuit suppressed exculpatory evidence (and seemingly manufactured evidence) to maintain the amazingly high level of surveillance on him, and by default, anyone he associated with.

Reading through the IG report, the initial pretext for the FBI to surveil the Trump campaign was Popodapolous - and the IG found that pretext to be sufficient. The report clearly states that Crossfire Hurricane, which was the investigation into coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia, was built on that Popodapolous meeting. Further, you can read about the rationale to turn Crossfire Hurricane into a full investigation, and none of them are the Page FISA app. Heck, the initial Page FISA app was not submitted until Oct 2016, and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on 31 July 2016.

So how exactly was a FISA warrant two months after an investigation into the campaign was started, an initial pretext to spy on the campaign?

The IG report tells us some nice timelines. On August 15th, The FBI’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) informed the Crossfire Hurricane team “there was an insufficient basis for them to proceed with a FISA application” for George Papadopoulos. (One of the functions of the OGC is to prepare applications for the FISA Court.) The Crossfire Hurricane team dropped the matter of the Papadopoulus FISA.

On August 15th, the same team requested assistance from OGC to prepare a FISA application for Carter Page.

Later in August, the team was told the OGC had consulted with the attorneys in the Office of Intelligence (OI) in the DOJ’s National Security Division (the OI prepares FISA applications and presents them to the FISA Court), there was insufficient information to establish probable cause (PC) for a warrant to spy on Page.

In other words, the team was shot down in getting Papadopoulos FISA-ed. The same day they ran back to the OGC with a request to FISA Page, which was also shot down. Then they reapply for the FISA with the altered items.



Funny, this is the same day that Strzok shot Page the telling "I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy's [McCabe's] office" and "[i]t's like an insurance policy" text.

Cool.

So we agree that the Page FISA app was not the initial pretext for opening an investigation into the Trump campaign?

The completely ginned up Papadoupolos one was their initial foray. All the difference. (good grief).

The funny thing is that you absolutely refuse to see or acknowledge the absolute boner these people had for investigating Trump. Geezus Krist in a handbag.

(12-12-2019 03:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  all omniscient NY Times.

Thrice redundant. All You needed was NYT.

(12-12-2019 04:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 04:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Carter Page served as an initial pretext for Obama's FBI to surveil the Trump campaign.

To that end they took out an initial FISA warrant on him on the basis of the Democratic-paid for Steele dossier; they renewed that warrant three times.

They found nothing on him.

In fact, the FBI in that pursuit suppressed exculpatory evidence (and seemingly manufactured evidence) to maintain the amazingly high level of surveillance on him, and by default, anyone he associated with.

Reading through the IG report, the initial pretext for the FBI to surveil the Trump campaign was Popodapolous - and the IG found that pretext to be sufficient. The report clearly states that Crossfire Hurricane, which was the investigation into coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia, was built on that Popodapolous meeting. Further, you can read about the rationale to turn Crossfire Hurricane into a full investigation, and none of them are the Page FISA app. Heck, the initial Page FISA app was not submitted until Oct 2016, and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on 31 July 2016.

So how exactly was a FISA warrant two months after an investigation into the campaign was started, an initial pretext to spy on the campaign?

The IG report tells us some nice timelines. On August 15th, The FBI’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) informed the Crossfire Hurricane team “there was an insufficient basis for them to proceed with a FISA application” for George Papadopoulos. (One of the functions of the OGC is to prepare applications for the FISA Court.) The Crossfire Hurricane team dropped the matter of the Papadopoulus FISA.

On August 15th, the same team requested assistance from OGC to prepare a FISA application for Carter Page.

Later in August, the team was told the OGC had consulted with the attorneys in the Office of Intelligence (OI) in the DOJ’s National Security Division (the OI prepares FISA applications and presents them to the FISA Court), there was insufficient information to establish probable cause (PC) for a warrant to spy on Page.

In other words, the team was shot down in getting Papadopoulos FISA-ed. The same day they ran back to the OGC with a request to FISA Page, which was also shot down. Then they reapply for the FISA with the altered items.



Funny, this is the same day that Strzok shot Page the telling "I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy's [McCabe's] office" and "[i]t's like an insurance policy" text.

Cool.

So we agree that the Page FISA app was not the initial pretext for opening an investigation into the Trump campaign?

The completely ginned up Papadoupolos one was their initial foray. All the difference. (good grief).

The funny thing is that you absolutely refuse to see or acknowledge the absolute boner these people had for investigating Trump. Geezus Krist in a handbag.

I'm waiting for the other report to speculate about the intentions.

Right now, I'm making sure people who talk about the report are doing so in a factual manner. A significant portion of the report goes through the opening of the investigation into the Trump campaign (Crossfire Hurricane), and how there does not appear to be anything improper there - yet we have had posters try and refute that explicitly.

The IG also found that the decision to open investigations into four individuals (Papadopolous, Page, Manafort, and Flynn) were appropriate.

The FBI began acting improperly well after the investigation was opened, and when they wanted to be more intrusive and FISA survey Page. Note that they never tried to survey Manafort or Flynn, which weakens your boner argument. They seemed to have a huge boner for Page, and not any of the other Trump associates.

Also, to use the fact that an investigative team would look to use multiple resources (e.g. two potential FISA apps) as an indictment as to them having a "boner" for doing their job, is really weird. Do you stop your work as soon as you hit a road block or do you only look at one option? I would get your point if the FBI tried multiple times to get FISA warrants for multiple people - but it seems like they care about Page the most, and the question is why Pgae?

We will get the answers from Durham...and likely in the middle of the campaign.

I would think that would have the antiTrumpers quaking in their boots.

The whole thing stunk from beginning to now. It will be stinking in the history books a half century from now. The left has gotten so used to being upset over their own made up facts that most of them cannot tell nor do they care what is real and what is not.

I commend lad for being more level headed than most of his bunch.

The "impeachment" continues as we type. It seems this is the whole raison d'etre for many of the Democrats. Several have vowed to keep impeaching time after time until something sticks.

President Trump will leave office in 2025 as the only president impeached multiple times, but never removed.

Prediction: January 20, 2025. 12:01 EST. The Democrats will bring civil and criminal cases against ex-President Trump.

(12-12-2019 05:34 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 04:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 04:18 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 03:55 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Reading through the IG report, the initial pretext for the FBI to surveil the Trump campaign was Popodapolous - and the IG found that pretext to be sufficient. The report clearly states that Crossfire Hurricane, which was the investigation into coordination between Trump’s campaign and Russia, was built on that Popodapolous meeting. Further, you can read about the rationale to turn Crossfire Hurricane into a full investigation, and none of them are the Page FISA app. Heck, the initial Page FISA app was not submitted until Oct 2016, and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on 31 July 2016.

So how exactly was a FISA warrant two months after an investigation into the campaign was started, an initial pretext to spy on the campaign?

The IG report tells us some nice timelines. On August 15th, The FBI’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) informed the Crossfire Hurricane team “there was an insufficient basis for them to proceed with a FISA application” for George Papadopoulos. (One of the functions of the OGC is to prepare applications for the FISA Court.) The Crossfire Hurricane team dropped the matter of the Papadopoulus FISA.

On August 15th, the same team requested assistance from OGC to prepare a FISA application for Carter Page.

Later in August, the team was told the OGC had consulted with the attorneys in the Office of Intelligence (OI) in the DOJ’s National Security Division (the OI prepares FISA applications and presents them to the FISA Court), there was insufficient information to establish probable cause (PC) for a warrant to spy on Page.

In other words, the team was shot down in getting Papadopoulos FISA-ed. The same day they ran back to the OGC with a request to FISA Page, which was also shot down. Then they reapply for the FISA with the altered items.



Funny, this is the same day that Strzok shot Page the telling "I want to believe the path you threw out in Andy's [McCabe's] office" and "[i]t's like an insurance policy" text.

Cool.

So we agree that the Page FISA app was not the initial pretext for opening an investigation into the Trump campaign?

The completely ginned up Papadoupolos one was their initial foray. All the difference. (good grief).

The funny thing is that you absolutely refuse to see or acknowledge the absolute boner these people had for investigating Trump. Geezus Krist in a handbag.

I'm waiting for the other report to speculate about the intentions.

Right now, I'm making sure people who talk about the report are doing so in a factual manner. A significant portion of the report goes through the opening of the investigation into the Trump campaign (Crossfire Hurricane), and how there does not appear to be anything improper there - yet we have had posters try and refute that explicitly.

The IG also found that the decision to open investigations into four individuals (Papadopolous, Page, Manafort, and Flynn) were appropriate.

The FBI began acting improperly well after the investigation was opened, and when they wanted to be more intrusive and FISA survey Page. Note that they never tried to survey Manafort or Flynn, which weakens your boner argument. They seemed to have a huge boner for Page, and not any of the other Trump associates.

Also, to use the fact that an investigative team would look to use multiple resources (e.g. two potential FISA apps) as an indictment as to them having a "boner" for doing their job, is really weird. Do you stop your work as soon as you hit a road block or do you only look at one option? I would get your point if the FBI tried multiple times to get FISA warrants for multiple people - but it seems like they care about Page the most, and the question is why Pgae?

The crap they pulled with and on Flynn actually supports it. Care to try again with some real world facts there? Again, I guess you dont follow the 302 issue there in the sentencing phase, do you? Perhaps you should. They parallel the issues and the actions in the Horowitz report quite nicely. To the extent of after the fact changing pertinent facts in the interview record. There is a *real* reason why Flynn hasnt been sentenced as of yet, I suggest you read up on it.

Or how about how Bruce Ohr decided on his own to amble over from the Assistant Director for Organized Crime, which has no fing business in any such intelligence/counter-intelligence based investigation mind you, and proceeds to 'rehab' the Steele Dossier to aid in the Crossfire investigation *and* rehab Steele from a 'not trusted and do not use' source in the eyes of the FBI to a 'trusted source' for purposes of the FISA application?

I guess you forgot all about those little issues.

I mean, why dont you educate yourself and look at Senator Sasse's questions to Horowitz yesterday. Or perhaps even look at any portion of the hearing. Horowitz was actually quite illustrative in what he says.

I mean, you seem seriously disposed to put everything in the world into the 'put your head into the sand and ignore it mode' on this.

So yes, in toto there is a group of people within the team, and people who inserted themselves as 'part of team' (Ohr) who on the surface went out of their fing way to gin up and continue any investigation they could on Trump. From fabricating evidence, to 'rehabing' witnesses, to after the fact edits to 302 interview notes, and...... well one in a normal world would get the picture.

To the extent that these actions seem pervasive and broad, yes, I think that these stating that these people had a boner to investigate Trump seems fairly on point. But I am not surprised in the slightest that you do not think so.

And, you are seemingly oblivious to the comments from Durham day before yesterday on the disagreements between his point of view, as being the chief US Attorney investigating the issue, and that of Horowitz on the origination issue.

But in lad-world I guess we just mark everything up to Gillete Razor.

Quote:The FBI began acting improperly well after the investigation was opened,

Not necessarily according to Durham's comments. But I am sure than the lad knows *far* more than him on this.

(12-12-2019 05:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We will get the answers from Durham...and likely in the middle of the campaign.

I would think that would have the antiTrumpers quaking in their boots.

The whole thing stunk from beginning to now. It will be stinking in the history books a half century from now. The left has gotten so used to being upset over their own made up facts that most of them cannot tell nor do they care what is real and what is not.

I commend lad for being more level headed than most of his bunch.

The "impeachment" continues as we type. It seems this is the whole raison d'etre for many of the Democrats. Several have vowed to keep impeaching time after time until something sticks.

President Trump will leave office in 2025 as the only president impeached multiple times, but never removed.

Prediction: January 20, 2025. 12:01 EST. The Democrats will bring civil and criminal cases against ex-President Trump.

Some answers as well from the Flynn sentencing outcome.

(12-12-2019 05:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 05:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We will get the answers from Durham...and likely in the middle of the campaign.

I would think that would have the antiTrumpers quaking in their boots.

The whole thing stunk from beginning to now. It will be stinking in the history books a half century from now. The left has gotten so used to being upset over their own made up facts that most of them cannot tell nor do they care what is real and what is not.

I commend lad for being more level headed than most of his bunch.

The "impeachment" continues as we type. It seems this is the whole raison d'etre for many of the Democrats. Several have vowed to keep impeaching time after time until something sticks.

President Trump will leave office in 2025 as the only president impeached multiple times, but never removed.

Prediction: January 20, 2025. 12:01 EST. The Democrats will bring civil and criminal cases against ex-President Trump.

Some answers as well from the Flynn sentencing outcome.

Is it normal to have the sentencing phase take three years?

I remember when the left was pointing to Flynn's guilty plea as proof the witch hunt was finding witches.

(12-12-2019 06:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 05:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 05:48 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  We will get the answers from Durham...and likely in the middle of the campaign.

I would think that would have the antiTrumpers quaking in their boots.

The whole thing stunk from beginning to now. It will be stinking in the history books a half century from now. The left has gotten so used to being upset over their own made up facts that most of them cannot tell nor do they care what is real and what is not.

I commend lad for being more level headed than most of his bunch.

The "impeachment" continues as we type. It seems this is the whole raison d'etre for many of the Democrats. Several have vowed to keep impeaching time after time until something sticks.

President Trump will leave office in 2025 as the only president impeached multiple times, but never removed.

Prediction: January 20, 2025. 12:01 EST. The Democrats will bring civil and criminal cases against ex-President Trump.

Some answers as well from the Flynn sentencing outcome.

Is it normal to have the sentencing phase take three years?

There are..... 'problems'.... there re: actions by 'Federal agents'.

And no, sentencing does not typically take three years.

Actually call the Flynn sentencing 'potentially having answers'.

(12-12-2019 06:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I remember when the left was pointing to Flynn's guilty plea as proof the witch hunt was finding witches.

Now the FBI, through the US Attorney, is fighting tooth and nail to avoid having to produce items sought by the defense that are claimed by the defense to be exculpatory in nature and withheld.

What's the point of this?

I don't think I can begin to describe the difference between an internal bias (which is natural) and manufacturing evidence or making intentionally false statements (which is criminal).

There is a difference between thinking Trump is a crook and looking for evidence to prove it, and in the absence of that, manufacturing such evidence.

I mean seriously, how is this any different than a cop who plants a gun or claims that the guy he shot had one?

What would the left be arguing if that had been the circumstances rather than this? That because the guy was a bully, that he deserved it so it was okay?

Democrats nervous

"The stock market is roaring. Unemployment is at a record low. The economy added 266,000 new jobs in November. Though these things are objectively good, of course, they are less good if you are a Democrat and you don’t want the current president to get credit for anything that might help him get re-elected."

"For the last three years, therapists have reported an increase in patients who say that almost anything having to do with politics is making them uneasy, angry and hopeless, a condition that Jennifer C. Panning, a psychologist in Evanston, Ill., has christened “Trump anxiety disorder.”

(12-13-2019 11:43 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I don't think I can begin to describe the difference between an internal bias (which is natural) and manufacturing evidence or making intentionally false statements (which is criminal).

There is a difference between thinking Trump is a crook and looking for evidence to prove it, and in the absence of that, manufacturing such evidence.

I mean seriously, how is this any different than a cop who plants a gun or claims that the guy he shot had one?

What would the left be arguing if that had been the circumstances rather than this? That because the guy was a bully, that he deserved it so it was okay?

Wait, an FBI agent manufactured evidence that says Trump was a crook?

(12-12-2019 07:08 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  What's the point of this?

What difference does it make?

(12-13-2019 12:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 07:08 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  What's the point of this?

What difference does it make?

Dude is yelling about a 16 yr old. The dude is POTUS.

(12-13-2019 12:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-13-2019 12:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 07:08 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  What's the point of this?

What difference does it make?

Dude is yelling about a 16 yr old. The dude is POTUS.

So what difference does it make?

I mean, it seems that you people have to find fault with every single thing that Trump does, and make every molehill a mountain. I may not care for this, but in the grand scheme of things, what difference does it make?

If you want me to oppose Trump, give me somebody better as an alternative.

(12-13-2019 12:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-13-2019 12:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(12-13-2019 12:09 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2019 07:08 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  What's the point of this?

What difference does it make?

Dude is yelling about a 16 yr old. The dude is POTUS.

So what difference does it make?

I mean, it seems that you people have to find fault with every single thing that Trump does, and make every molehill a mountain. I may not care for this, but in the grand scheme of things, what difference does it make?

If you want me to oppose Trump, give me somebody better as an alternative.

Yes, a post on a sport's related message board is truly a mountain.