Gummug Posted January 13, 2020 #1201 Share Posted January 13, 2020 On 12/22/2019 at 12:42 PM, Manwon Lender said: Here you go partner this article covers the Charity Theft, as far as Russian meddling is concerned it has been proven by the US intellegents community, you can look that up for yourself. https://apnews.com/7b8d0f5ce9cb4cadad948c2c414afd57 Oh and by the way there us much more on this subject online just do search, it's easy to find. Now I suppose we will see if you can apologize when your wrong. Peace If you read this article, it looks like he gave to charitable causes far more than he took, which was around 21,000 dollars, if I read the article correctly. Maybe he needed the pocket change and was going to pay it back, Idk. In any case, considering the Clinton foundation has seemed to be bullet proof, I look at this article with an extremely jaundiced eye!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 13, 2020 #1202 Share Posted January 13, 2020 4 minutes ago, Gummug said: If you read this article, it looks like he gave to charitable causes far more than he took, which was around 21,000 dollars, if I read the article correctly. Maybe he needed the pocket change and was going to pay it back, Idk. In any case, considering the Clinton foundation has seemed to be bullet proof, I look at this article with an extremely jaundiced eye!! So because you think one politician got away with crimes you think others should be allowed to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 13, 2020 #1203 Share Posted January 13, 2020 1 minute ago, Farmer77 said: So because you think one politician got away with crimes you think others should be allowed to? No, certainly not, but I am not convinced he actually did anything illegal. (unlike the Clintons). I would need to do more research on this and not sure I have the energy right now. It is getting late... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 13, 2020 #1204 Share Posted January 13, 2020 2 minutes ago, Gummug said: No, certainly not, but I am not convinced he actually did anything illegal. (unlike the Clintons). I would need to do more research on this and not sure I have the energy right now. It is getting late... So the court finding he did something illegal isnt enough? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 13, 2020 #1205 Share Posted January 13, 2020 22 hours ago, RoofGardener said: Oh great.. more uncertainty Senate rules only require 51 affirmative votes to be changed. The rationale for calling witnesses so that D's will feel it is "fair" is childish. These people blatantly threw due process out and even THEN they couldn't change poll numbers in their favor. McConnell needs to listen to the opening arguments and then vote. If 3 or 4 Republicans vote in favor of witnesses then there will be an accomodation made to call witnesses but remember that at ANY point in this process, it only takes 51 votes to end it before the managers have completed presenting their ridiculous "case". 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 13, 2020 #1206 Share Posted January 13, 2020 Interesting thought....... Attorneys George Conway and Neal Katyal advise Pelosi on how she can trip up McConnell’s impeachment plans Quote On Friday, conservative attorney George Conway and law professor Neal Katyal wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post suggesting a key way that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) could get the upper hand on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Specifically, they argued, Pelosi should “split up” the articles of impeachment — submitting the article of obstruction of Congress, but holding onto the article of abuse of power for further investigation. “Separating the two articles — our preferred approach — would make perfect sense,” they wrote. “When it comes to the second article, all the evidence about Trump’s obstruction is a matter of public record. There’s nothing more to add, so the second article is ripe for trial. But as to the first, although there is plenty of evidence demonstrating Trump’s guilt, his obstruction has prevented all of the evidence from coming to light.” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Hammerclaw Posted January 13, 2020 #1207 Share Posted January 13, 2020 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 13, 2020 #1208 Share Posted January 13, 2020 Why Trump's plan to bar Bolton from testifying won't work: "There are limits to executive privilege" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted January 13, 2020 #1209 Share Posted January 13, 2020 On 12/22/2019 at 6:42 PM, Manwon Lender said: Here you go partner this article covers the Charity Theft, as far as Russian meddling is concerned it has been proven by the US intellegents community, you can look that up for yourself. Yes, a few thousand dollars' worth of ads on facebook, wasn't it? I mean wow. This is the face I make as I'm so shocked. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 13, 2020 #1210 Share Posted January 13, 2020 8 hours ago, Farmer77 said: So the court finding he did something illegal isnt enough? There are such things as corrupt courts. As I said, I'd need to research it and wondering if it's worth the effort. People seem pretty entrenched in their opinions here... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 13, 2020 #1211 Share Posted January 13, 2020 On 12/27/2019 at 10:19 PM, Doug1029 said: The charity has already been shut down and its assets distributed to other charities. As I recall, there was a fine, but not as much as Trump stole. The Clinton foundation has already been investigated and found to be in compliance with the law. Doug If the Clinton foundation was found to be in compliance with the law, then I am thinking the courts are more corrupt than I thought. It would also make me think Trump really did do nothing wrong. Unless you believe the courts themselves are infallible? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted January 13, 2020 #1212 Share Posted January 13, 2020 3 minutes ago, Gummug said: If the Clinton foundation was found to be in compliance with the law, then I am thinking the courts are more corrupt than I thought. It would also make me think Trump really did do nothing wrong. Unless you believe the courts themselves are infallible? Not the courts - the FBI. I have a question for Trump and you trumpets. Why doesn't Daddy Warbucks hire private investigators and go after the Clintons himself? Why not put his money where his mouth is? Doug 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 13, 2020 #1213 Share Posted January 13, 2020 On 1/6/2020 at 7:35 PM, Gromdor said: https://thehill.com/policy/international/327673-russia-recognizes-jerusalem-as-israeli-capital So where would you like your break? I'm still not convinced. Anyone who has been following current events knows Russia has not exactly been a friend to Israel. Maybe Putin is trying to make it look like Trump is a puppet, but a red flag here even I can see is Putin thinks Jerusalem should be divided or shared. And my car could use some new brakes thank you very much. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromdor Posted January 13, 2020 #1214 Share Posted January 13, 2020 7 hours ago, Gummug said: I'm still not convinced. Anyone who has been following current events knows Russia has not exactly been a friend to Israel. Maybe Putin is trying to make it look like Trump is a puppet, but a red flag here even I can see is Putin thinks Jerusalem should be divided or shared. And my car could use some new brakes thank you very much. Honestly, if you don't trust the media, FBI, the court system, and don't have time to research on your own- you will just have to accept that you will be pretty much in the dark about most everything because there really isn't anything an anonymous internet associate like me can do for you. . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 14, 2020 #1215 Share Posted January 14, 2020 3 hours ago, Gromdor said: Honestly, if you don't trust the media, FBI, the court system, and don't have time to research on your own- you will just have to accept that you will be pretty much in the dark about most everything because there really isn't anything an anonymous internet associate like me can do for you. . Well I may not be sure about the court system, but we have CLEARLY seen how "fair and impartial" the media and FBI have been....NOT ... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 14, 2020 #1216 Share Posted January 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, Gummug said: Well I may not be sure about the court system, but we have CLEARLY seen how "fair and impartial" the media and FBI have been....NOT ... Vary your news sources Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 14, 2020 #1217 Share Posted January 14, 2020 11 hours ago, Doug1029 said: Not the courts - the FBI. I have a question for Trump and you trumpets. Why doesn't Daddy Warbucks hire private investigators and go after the Clintons himself? Why not put his money where his mouth is? Doug I don't know for sure but maybe he has more pressing matters, or bigger fish to fry, as it were? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 14, 2020 #1218 Share Posted January 14, 2020 2 minutes ago, Farmer77 said: Vary your news sources I try to but I can only stand so much of MSNBC and the like.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 14, 2020 #1219 Share Posted January 14, 2020 11 hours ago, Doug1029 said: Not the courts - the FBI. I have a question for Trump and you trumpets. Why doesn't Daddy Warbucks hire private investigators and go after the Clintons himself? Why not put his money where his mouth is? Doug Also why is the Federal government even involved in charity fraud? Why is everything a federal case nowadays? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummug Posted January 14, 2020 #1220 Share Posted January 14, 2020 Well off for now to enjoy some beans and cornbread. Peace out. Shalom... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatetopa Posted January 14, 2020 #1221 Share Posted January 14, 2020 11 hours ago, Gummug said: If the Clinton foundation was found to be in compliance with the law, then I am thinking the courts are more corrupt than I thought. I think you are barking up the wrong tree. It is the duty of Congress to write the laws, not the courts. If Congress writes laws as they frequently do with the help of lobbyists and special interests, advised by lawyers then the loopholes are built in from the start. The lawyers know where they are and how to use them because they are the folks that put them in. A judges is not supposed to write new laws or interpret what the founders or Congress actually meant when they wrote a law, they are supposed to go by the letter of it. I think you might focus your ire on the legislators and the money that buys them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatetopa Posted January 14, 2020 #1222 Share Posted January 14, 2020 32 minutes ago, Gummug said: Also why is the Federal government even involved in charity fraud? Why is everything a federal case nowadays? Not the federal government, the State of New York where the charity is registered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted January 14, 2020 #1223 Share Posted January 14, 2020 35 minutes ago, Gummug said: Also why is the Federal government even involved in charity fraud? Why is everything a federal case nowadays? I don't know about EVERYTHING. I think the State of New York is going to have a lot to say about Trump's business dealings, especially the fraud parts. Doug 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 14, 2020 #1224 Share Posted January 14, 2020 (edited) For everyone asking why Pelosi held the articles, the bold is the payoff. How Schumer might get the last laugh on impeachment trial Quote While Senate Majority Leader McConnell has locked up enough Republican votes to ignore demands for a bipartisan framework for President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, his Democratic counterpart is readying a counteroffensive. Schumer will force a series of votes designed to squeeze vulnerable Republicans and harm them on the campaign trail if they side with Trump. Democrats argue the half-dozen at-risk GOP senators will need some daylight between them and Trump to get reelected. And if they vote against Schumer’s motions to hear new evidence and witness testimony, they’ll be seen as Trump sycophants — undermining their bids and boosting Schumer’s odds of becoming majority leader. Support for obtaining new documents at the trial is “even stronger than we thought, with large numbers of Republicans supporting it,” Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in an interview. “And when you go against what the American people feel strongly about, on an issue they’re paying attention to, it’s not a good idea.” Public surveys in key swing states back up Democrats’ claims. Polling from Hart Research found that 63 percent of voters in Arizona, Colorado, Maine and North Carolina would react unfavorably if their senator voted against calling witnesses or subpoenaing documents during the Senate impeachment trial. Another poll from Morning Consult found 57 percent of voters believe the Senate should call additional witnesses. That includes 71 percent of Democrats, 56 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans. Edited January 14, 2020 by Farmer77 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer77 Posted January 14, 2020 #1225 Share Posted January 14, 2020 hmmmmmmmmmm White House expects GOP defections on calling witnesses in Senate impeachment trial Quote Washington — The White House is preparing for some Republican senators to join Democrats in voting to call witnesses in President Trump's impeachment trial, which could get underway in the coming days. Senior White House officials tell CBS News they increasingly believe that at least four Republicans, and likely more, will vote to call witnesses. In addition to Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Mitt Romney of Utah and possibly Cory Gardner of Colorado, the White House also views Rand Paul of Kentucky as a "wild card" and Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee as an "institutionalist" who might vote to call witnesses, as one official put it. Last week, Collins said she was working with a "fairly small group" of GOP senators to allow new testimony, adding that her colleagues "should be completely open to calling witnesses." Romney has expressed an interest in hearing from former national security adviser John Bolton, who has said he would testify under subpoena. Murkowski said last week that the Senate should proceed as it did during the 1999 Clinton impeachment trial Conversely Collins is a famous liar about such things. She seems to always be talking the talk but then voting with Trump come crunch time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now