Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
BrooklynGuy

Trump Is Good Thread ;-)

328 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

third_eye
16 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

Nothing wrong with a Quid Pro Quo if it involves a legal, lawful arrangement, or, deal.

Using political office to leverage the shutdown of a criminal or corruption probe into a family member isn't legal.  That's why Gropey Joe and his coke-a-holic son are in deep doo doo.

Let's say a manager of your place of employment, forget a leader of the most powerful nation on planet earth™, just the manager of your department who calls you up and say "you've been slacking on your job, but it's okay, I like you, let's work something out, Joe, you know Joe? Yeah, they say he's going to replace me, I like you, I know you're going to do the right thing, I know you like my daughter, you know my daughter? She likes you too, make something happen to Joe, you think of something, he's crooked, I know there's a spot in marketing management, you play it right, you're going to be promoted, you're great, let's make this company great again... "

You'll sit beside him in court if charges are brought against him for criminal breach of trust? 

~

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hankenhunter

This just in.

Virginia just went blue.

Kentucky has a new Dem governor. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/05/politics/election-night-kentucky-virginia/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjg1Iq-2NTlAhWUKn0KHYUeCLcQxfQBMAt6BAgCEAg&usg=AOvVaw1EIhIvXJkeJbnHxEA7IF-Q

And once again trump applies the kiss of death to another repub stronghold. Just wondering, can turtles sweat? 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
14 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Let's say a manager of your place of employment, forget a leader of the most powerful nation on planet earth™, just the manager of your department who calls you up and say "you've been slacking on your job, but it's okay, I like you, let's work something out, Joe, you know Joe? Yeah, they say he's going to replace me, I like you, I know you're going to do the right thing, I know you like my daughter, you know my daughter? She likes you too, make something happen to Joe, you think of something, he's crooked, I know there's a spot in marketing management, you play it right, you're going to be promoted, you're great, let's make this company great again... "

You'll sit beside him in court if charges are brought against him for criminal breach of trust? 

~

If making "something happen to Joe" means exposing something wrong that Joe did, then the quid pro quo is probably legal.  Slimy, perhaps, but legal.

If it means setting Joe up to take a fall for something he didn't do, then it's illegal.

Dems can't stand it that Trump might "benefit" from the truth coming out about Dem illegal activities.  Therefore, they want to criminalize exposing the truth.

That's where we're at.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hankenhunter
6 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

If making "something happen to Joe" means exposing something wrong that Joe did, then the quid pro quo is probably legal.  Slimy, perhaps, but legal.

If it means setting Joe up to take a fall for something he didn't do, then it's illegal.

Dems can't stand it that Trump might "benefit" from the truth coming out about Dem illegal activities.  Therefore, they want to criminalize exposing the truth.

That's where we're at.

 

1320529223886.jpg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
3 minutes ago, hacktorp said:

If making "something happen to Joe" means exposing something wrong that Joe did, then the quid pro quo is probably legal.  Slimy, perhaps, but legal.

If it means setting Joe up to take a fall for something he didn't do, then it's illegal.

Dems can't stand it that Trump might "benefit" from the truth coming out about Dem illegal activities.  Therefore, they want to criminalize exposing the truth.

That's where we're at.

What you're saying here is the benefits of the post and position allows you profit yourself regardless of the veracity of accusations? 

How do you know "joe" did anything wrong other than hearsay and the boss says so? 

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
8 minutes ago, third_eye said:

What you're saying here is the benefits of the post and position allows you profit yourself regardless of the veracity of accusations? 

How do you know "joe" did anything wrong other than hearsay and the boss says so? 

~

How do you know "Trump" did anything wrong other than hearsay and the Dems say so? Oh wait; that's why we have investigations.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hacktorp
6 minutes ago, third_eye said:

What you're saying here is the benefits of the post and position allows you profit yourself regardless of the veracity of accusations? 

How do you know "joe" did anything wrong other than hearsay and the boss says so? 

~

No, I didn't say that at all.   I said if Joe did something illegal, he has put himself in a position to be exploited by others.  If he was set up fraudulently, those who did it stand to pay the price.

Is that so difficult for you to understand?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
2 hours ago, hacktorp said:

No, I didn't say that at all.   I said if Joe did something illegal, he has put himself in a position to be exploited by others.  If he was set up fraudulently, those who did it stand to pay the price.

Is that so difficult for you to understand?

Hmmmm ... I don't think you understand why that's unacceptable and not difficult, that's swimming in the swamp and not draining the swamp. 

~

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
2 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

How do you know "Trump" did anything wrong other than hearsay and the Dems say so? Oh wait; that's why we have investigations.

He admitted it as much as everybody around him does, it's illegal and wrong but not impeachable, not misdemeanors and high crimes... Heck, even as far as 'all the time' and everybody does it too, apparently... 

~

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Manwon Lender
5 hours ago, third_eye said:

Just curious here, from someone outside the fishbowl, let's put aside party lines, forget this is Trump, is Quid pro quo for personal and political ambitions legal or illegal, not weighing in the right or wrong... 

~

Mistake

Edited by Manwon Lender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
1 hour ago, third_eye said:

He admitted it as much as everybody around him does, it's illegal and wrong but not impeachable, not misdemeanors and high crimes... Heck, even as far as 'all the time' and everybody does it too, apparently... 

~

He may have admitted doing something you think is wrong--I rather doubt that he did. Trump and family spent three years being tormented by a global inquisition with Dems and their minions trying to dig up dirt on them in country after country, over something that was determined to, not, in fact, have happened. So, forgive us if we roll our eyes and look askance at all the melodrama concerning poor, ptiful Joe and son. It's just a preview of what will happen if he's elected. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
7 hours ago, and then said:

I recall there being one or two polls in 2016 that were nearly accurate while the great majority were in the bag for HRC.  It all depends on the desire of the polling entity to get accurate results rather than to push an agenda.

Hmm... that would be to suppose that the University had some sort of agenda ? I can't see any evidence for that ? 

7 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

The evidence that is already out is worthy of kicking out any president. If the senate doesn't vote to do so it will be based solely on their spinelessness and tcss. It doesn't absolve him or prove he did nothing wrong. All it does is create a "new normal" for american politics in which anything goes if the president is doing it. Good luck with hoping future presidents follow ethical standards and practices after that.

So if he is impeached, he is guilty. But if impeachment fails, on the other hand,  he is ... guilty. 

I think you've made your mind up on this one already @Robotic Jew :D 

4 hours ago, Hankenhunter said:

This just in.

Virginia just went blue.

Kentucky has a new Dem governor. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/05/politics/election-night-kentucky-virginia/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjg1Iq-2NTlAhWUKn0KHYUeCLcQxfQBMAt6BAgCEAg&usg=AOvVaw1EIhIvXJkeJbnHxEA7IF-Q

And once again trump applies the kiss of death to another repub stronghold. Just wondering, can turtles sweat? 

Virginia has NOT gone blue.. yet. That is just a CNN projection, set against incredibly close voting figures. At the same time, the Republicans won victories over the Democrats in Kentucky and Mississippi :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
4 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

How do you know "Trump" did anything wrong other than hearsay and the Dems say so? Oh wait; that's why we have investigations.

It's not just hearsay. There are documents including texts and emails, along with phone records and other standard corroboration events.

More importantly, when someone tells you that they delivered the quid pro quo message in person, as Sondland just did, it's not 'hearsay' anymore. It's beyond just rumour. 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
47 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

He may have admitted doing something you think is wrong--I rather doubt that he did. Trump and family spent three years being tormented by a global inquisition with Dems and their minions trying to dig up dirt on them in country after country, over something that was determined to, not, in fact, have happened. So, forgive us if we roll our eyes and look askance at all the melodrama concerning poor, ptiful Joe and son. It's just a preview of what will happen if he's elected. 

As it has been clearly stated to me so that I fully understand the funny of it all, Trump did admit to it but denies wrong doing because he accused the Bidens as being worse. 

And it's illegal according to the constitution by the way, not because somebody thinks it is, be they R or D. 

Ivanka is going to be charged in Court unless there's a plea bargain, Rudi is well done for, Bolton is still determined to have his say comes the day... 

Butter up the popcorn... 

~

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
14 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I think you've made your mind up on this one already @Robotic Jew :D 

It's a bot hard not to when his own Ambassador, a man Trump pointed at to say 'look, nothing happened', exposes the truth after being caught lying under oath.

Sondland confirmed it all, as you can see from the testimony and info released yesterday. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
34 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm... that would be to suppose that the University had some sort of agenda ? I can't see any evidence for that ?

I was speaking of polling results in general.  

 

34 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I think you've made your mind up on this one already @Robotic Jew 

Bingo!

 

21 minutes ago, third_eye said:

As it has been clearly stated to me so that I fully understand the funny of it all, Trump did admit to it but denies wrong doing because he accused the Bidens as being worse. 

Then whoever explained it did so from a biased perspective.  The TRUTH is that they refuse to give him the power he WON in 2016.  They seem to believe that because they don't "accept" him to be a "legitimate" president then they don't have to allow him to carry the imprimatur and the actual powers of that post.  He IS the U.S. president and in that position he was completely within the scope of his duties to ask that Ukraine investigate corruption in their country if they are going to continue to receive our aid.  The transcript of that call makes it clear he was asking for an investigation of PAST wrongdoing, NOT a special investigation of a political enemy.  This is why, regardless of the shrieking of his enemies, he will not be removed from office AND will almost certainly be re-elected.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
8 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

The evidence that is already out is worthy of kicking out any president.

Disagreeing with you is pointless but then, so is pointing out that there has been no real EVIDENCE produced that he committed any crime whatever.  Let's leave it at this, shall we?  His support is growing after 3 years of these accusations that "everyone" believes about him being (insert crime).  He got close to 65 million votes and, more importantly, he won the majority of votes in the majority of states and therefore won the presidential election.  Your supposition that he is convicted of crime and deserves to be removed is baseless and therefore meaningless except to salve your own anger and hatred at losing to him.  65 million of your neighbors decided to vote NOT HRC.  Rather than working hard to find a better candidate and to do the groundwork to get that name out in the public your party has opted to spend 3 years, going into a fourth, to spread as much hate against him as possible.  

The biggest lesson one of his haters could take would be to remember that the media don't always tell the truth and that when 65 million people cannot see what you believe to be true, MAYBE...just MAYBE, it isn't.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
9 minutes ago, and then said:

Disagreeing with you is pointless but then, so is pointing out that there has been no real EVIDENCE produced that he committed any crime whatever.  Let's leave it at this, shall we?  His support is growing after 3 years of these accusations that "everyone" believes about him being (insert crime).  He got close to 65 million votes and, more importantly, he won the majority of votes in the majority of states and therefore won the presidential election.  Your supposition that he is convicted of crime and deserves to be removed is baseless and therefore meaningless except to salve your own anger and hatred at losing to him.  65 million of your neighbors decided to vote NOT HRC.  Rather than working hard to find a better candidate and to do the groundwork to get that name out in the public your party has opted to spend 3 years, going into a fourth, to spread as much hate against him as possible.  

The biggest lesson one of his haters could take would be to remember that the media don't always tell the truth and that when 65 million people cannot see what you believe to be true, MAYBE...just MAYBE, it isn't.

Hmm.. possibly true @and then. Of course, for an impeachment, it is not necessary for any actual CRIME to have been committed. (in the sense of the Criminal justice code). They could impeach him for jaywalking. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
17 minutes ago, and then said:

Disagreeing with you is pointless but then, so is pointing out that there has been no real EVIDENCE produced that he committed any crime whatever.

First, there clearly is evidence of crimes, and more every day by the sounds of things. Sondland's testimony is evidence. Damning eveidence.

Secondly, there doesn't need to be a crime. Misuse of Position and Government Resources.

If a sewage worker can be fired by the government for abusing his position to use his truck for personal gain or reasons, then you better believe that it also applies to a President who used an entire State Department and hijacked Congress-approved foreign policy for his own personal gain. 

Edited by ExpandMyMind
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BrooklynGuy

I see we have a very spirited debate happening here on the merits of the article in the original post, carry on. :st 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
36 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. possibly true @and then. Of course, for an impeachment, it is not necessary for any actual CRIME to have been committed. (in the sense of the Criminal justice code). They could impeach him for jaywalking. 

Quite correct.   They can also pay the electoral bill a year from now.  Ultimately it is the voters who will decide the fate of those who keep the country in turmoil due to a petty resentment.  While the sheep on here may actually believe he committed "high crimes or misdemeanors", the truth is he was acting within the four corners of his power and duties and the enough of the voters can see that to be true.  As a perfect example of how this plays out in the real world we need look no farther than Bill Clinton's case.

The Republicans stayed on his back for years until they backed him into a corner and his pride wouldn't allow him to just admit what he did, ask forgiveness and move on.  He chose to perjure himself and Starr had a total of 11 indictments against him to include perjury, obstruction of justice and suborning perjury.  As I recall, the charges were well-founded and when he went before the Senate he was acquitted, not because he'd done no wrong but because the voters showed support for him.  Impeachment is a deadly serious, somber event and it represents overturning the will of millions of voters by a handful of potentially partisan hacks.  

They can Impeach for any reason but they'll be held to account at the ballot box.  Fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye
1 hour ago, and then said:

The transcript of that call makes it clear he was asking for an investigation of PAST wrongdoing, NOT a special investigation of a political enemy.  This is why, regardless of the shrieking of his enemies, he will not be removed from office AND will almost certainly be re-elected.

Not true and the "full" transcript" proves otherwise, but of course that won't stop you from yelling your lies from your little sand dungeon, as to whether he's reelected or not, best you keep screaming at somebody who cares. 

Pompeo just threw your beloved dear leader off the cliff to save himself. 

I'm just having a great time laughing at your silly little howls. 

~

Edited by third_eye
Android keyboard
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BrooklynGuy

More Good news for The Trump is Good Thread in the article below. When reached for comment Jeff Bezos the owner of Amazon and the revered Washington Post had this to say: Let me be crystal clear here, Donald Rump had absolutely nothing to do with our increase in sales, our expansion nor our need for more workers despite his policies that have America with record employment and unemployment numbers. After I personally changed the Obituary headline for Austere Religious Scholar, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi our Amazon sales and Washinton Post subscriptions are up 25% in Pakistan, Afganistan, Syria, Chechyna, Iran, Iraq, Russia and China. Also we have also seen at Amazon an unprecedented uptick in sales from our Washington Post logo line of merchandise with 90% of that merchandise being shipped free of charge to CNN and MSNBC. ;)

Announcement. (It's Incredibly Good News for President Trump)

Amazon made an unexpected announcement Monday that's truly good news all around. But the top beneficiary might just be President Donald J. Trump. The online-slash-everything giant revealed Monday that it currently has 30,000 unfilled jobs in the United States, everything including (as the company said in a statement. That's a lot of open jobs. We'll address how Amazon wants to fill them (and how to apply should you or a loved one be interested), below. It's worth stepping back first to explore what the idea of adding 30,000 new Amazon employees to the labor rolls would mean.

Read more: https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/amazon-just-made-a-truly-stunning-announcement-its-incredibly-good-news-for-president-trump.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hankenhunter
38 minutes ago, BrooklynGuy said:

I see we have a very spirited debate happening here on the merits of the article in the original post, carry on. :st 

Heh, dont dislocate anything patting yourself on the back.:whistle: Tis a good thread though. *tips hat*

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
54 minutes ago, BrooklynGuy said:

I see we have a very spirited debate happening here on the merits of the article in the original post, carry on. :st 

What do you mean? All of these threads are evidence of the poll results in your original post :lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.