ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Im not seeing the negative here. This kind of seems like pro Trump moment. Trump is making it very public how many times China has lied about a deal with us. He is making it well known to everyone that China is purposely trying to screw over the US. Because of that Trump is going to squeeze them and force them into a better deal for the US.

My guess is he is going to put up some tariffs, our economy will take a slight hit, you will come here everyday posting the stock market hits and acting like its the end of the Trump's good economy. While this is happening, China's economy will take an even bigger hit and a month or so after the tariffs, China and US will have a new trade deal that is more favorable for the US.
You way over estimate Trumps bargaining power and way under estimate China's ability to plan long term. Xi has China's roadmap laid out for 50 years. We can't even map out our future for 50 days. Im real sure they will just cave after a month, that has worked out real well so far. China is growing 3x faster than we are, they have a lot more room to breath and a leader that has no fear of losing an election. The US companies that are taking a big hit from the tariffs aren't even bringing the jobs back to the US, they are moving them to Vietnam. The rest of the companies will just raise prices and crush consumers. So the tariffs are a complete failure at every level.
 
"I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met, and I'd like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC (the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel) opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.

"That is correct," Mueller replied.


Same thing. They weren't allowed to make the determination.

Wrong wrong wrong. The second section of mullers report (a report written by Hillary's lawyer, btw) was an opinion piece that muller (hillary's lawyer) had no legality to write.
 
Wait you mean having a commercial basically just attacking your main demographic isn't a smart idea? Who would've thought it?

This would be like Oreos having a commercial just bashing lazy and fat people who like junk food, then being surprised that the lazy and fat people got offended and decided to buy Hostes Cupcakes instead.

Also I know Dollar Shave Club has been slowly eating away at Gillettes major market share for sometime now. This add no doubt didn't help.

That has to be one of the worst marketing campaigns in American history. Maybe one day corporate America will wake up and realize not everyone in America is a woke twitter user.
 
Wrong. He clarified they were never allowed to make a determination that a president committed a crime, not that they determined the president did commit a crime and they couldn't indict him. Mueller absolutely did not have the authority to criminally refer a president.


He didn't retract it, he clarified. See above.

His exact quote,

"We did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime"
 
They just posted this morning that China was buying tons of agri products. Then Trump tweets just now that China hasn't bought anything and they scream fake news. Pretty typical of this board, everything is fake news if the truth is inconvenient. They scream about how Dem's just tax tax tax. The tariffs are now equal to over 90 billion in new taxes this year, that in the largest raw dollar increase in US history.

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't tariffs a tax that CHINA has to pay?
 

His exact quote,

"We did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime"
EXACTLY. Because they were not allowed to due to the OLC guideline. They went in from the get-go never being able to because the new Special Counsel law puts it in the DOJ.

Directly from the report: "Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment."
 
That has to be one of the worst marketing campaigns in American history. Maybe one day corporate America will wake up and realize not everyone in America is a woke twitter user.
Yup. It doesn't take much for these things to "trend" on Twitter. Mario Lopez says parents shouldnt give their 3 year olds hormone blockers because they say they're trans. 8-10k people on Twitter flip out, that is literally the only people talking about it. Yet for some reason people feel like its a lot more.

Same goes for the Gillette add, it was clear as day they were trying to make an add that the "woke" people on Twitter would like. The thing is, those people dont buy your product and you sure as hell are going to lose more customers than gaining customers that way. And the entire purpose of an add is to do the complete opposite. Each add should gain you customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigSexyCat
What are some major metropolitan cities that traditionally have Republican leadership?

67429793_2503503983066129_8159724133324685312_n.jpg
 
"I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met, and I'd like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC (the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel) opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.

"That is correct," Mueller replied.

Now post what he said when he came back and recanted/corrected that.

Wrong. He clarified that they were never allowed to make a determination that a president committed a crime

The OLC says nothing of the such. A referral isn't an indictment. Making a determination was his job. He had zero problem making a determination on collusion/conspiracy. Why is that?

Mueller absolutely did not have the authority to criminally refer a president.

Yes he did. That was the whole point of the investigation. The OLC doesn't stop him from making a determination or referral.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't tariffs a tax that CHINA has to pay?
You are 100% wrong. Why are people so uneducated? Tariffs are paid on the goods as they transit into the country by the purchasing party. So consumers either pay them directly when buying direct or indirectly as businesses pass on the added cost. Or they fire employees to absorb the cost. This is why conservatives are 1000% anti tariffs, at least until Trump bent them over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ed323232
You are 100% wrong. Why are people so uneducated? Tariffs are paid on the goods as they transit into the country by the purchasing party. So consumers either pay them directly when buying direct or indirectly as businesses pass on the added cost. Or they fire employees to absorb the cost.

Fake News.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gassy_Knowls
Trump isn’t perfect. Many have stated 100 times over they don’t agree with his morals. Many have stated they didn’t vote for him in 2016, but like the job he’s doing.

I don’t like some of the things he’s done morally. God will judge him. But given the two options we had/will have, I’d take Trump every time regardless.

But he’s doing what’s best for the people here first. He’s trying to put America first. He didn’t go on some apology tour. He hasn’t made deals in the middle of the night going around congress to give a terrorist sponsoring country billions. He didn’t force me to buy healthcare.

Now you go. Did Obama’s fake Christian act upset you like Trump has?
I hate it when anyone fakes their faith. I've went to church with people who are there everytime the doors open. Always volunteering for everything. Then talk terrible about people behind their back.

I don't like that trump lies. And lies about stuff he doesn't need to lie about. He has done some good things. No doubt. And some things I hate. I don't like the wall bullshit. I hate that naive people actually believed Mexico was going to pay for it. He knew that was never happening. Now taking military money to build some. That's wrong. He treats the worst leaders the best. If he had his way he would be a dictator.
 
"I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met, and I'd like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC (the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel) opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.

"That is correct," Mueller replied.


Same thing. They weren't allowed to make the determination.
Opinion? [laughing]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gassy_Knowls
Now post what he said when he came back and recanted/corrected that.



The OLC says nothing of the such. A referral isn't an indictment. Making a determination was his job. He had zero problem making a determination on collusion/conspiracy. Why is that?



Yes he did. That was the whole point of the investigation. The OLC doesn't stop him from making a determination or referral.
You're just ignoring all the times in the report and in person Mueller explains that they went into this restricted from making a prosecutorial judgement.
 
EXACTLY. Because they were not allowed to due to the OLC guideline. They went in from the get-go never being able to because the new Special Counsel law puts it in the DOJ.

OLC guidelines only covers an indictment. Even the DOJ (who's guideline you're misrepresenting) was surprised by Mueller's balk.

Again the OLC didn't stop him from making a determination or criminal referral. Instead he chose to pass the buck to DOJ. DOJ made the determination for him since he passed the buck and they concluded (without taking the OLC into account) the evidence was insufficient.
 
He testified that they never considered charging the president because they couldn't due to the OLC. His testimony was the exact opposite of what you just said it was. They didn't accuse Trump of a crime because they were not allowed to.

You must have completely missed his later correction to that testimony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gassy_Knowls
Yup. It doesn't take much for these things to "trend" on Twitter. Mario Lopez says parents shouldnt give their 3 year olds hormone blockers because they say they're trans. 8-10k people on Twitter flip out, that is literally the only people talking about it. Yet for some reason people feel like its a lot more.

Same goes for the Gillette add, it was clear as day they were trying to make an add that the "woke" people on Twitter would like. The thing is, those people dont buy your product and you sure as hell are going to lose more customers than gaining customers that way. And the entire purpose of an add is to do the complete opposite. Each add should gain you customers.
The next time I give a shit what Mario Lopez thinks will be the first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duke4life831
"I believe a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice have been met, and I'd like to ask you the reason, again, you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC (the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel) opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu asked.

"That is correct," Mueller replied.


Same thing. They weren't allowed to make the determination.

It is not the same thing, you stated the only reason they didn't indict is because of the OLC, that is plain wrong. They didn't come to a conclusion one way or the other due to the OLC. He damn well could've recommended charges to Congress if there were any, his entire purpose was to come to a conclusion.

You know full well that Mueller corrected that statement at the start of his second testimony.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't tariffs a tax that CHINA has to pay?
This will help explain it to you. The steel companies that lobbied for the tariffs are now suing the government because the tariffs are bankrupting them.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...raised-trump-tariffs-now-suing-u-s-for-relief
Less than a year after JSW Steel (USA) Inc. lauded U.S. metal tariffs for aiding the steel industry, the company is suing because it’s not exempted from the levies. The producer says the Commerce Department wrongfully denied waivers for steel-slab raw materials, forcing the steelmaker to pay tens of millions of dollars in tariffs.
 
Legal opinion numbnuts. Guess it's too much to ask for rednecks to have the education required to understand legalese.
You have been proven wrong at every turn, perhaps you should get a better education than this "redneck". Born and raised in Louisville you idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gassy_Knowls
OLC guidelines only covers an indictment. Even the DOJ (who's guideline you're misrepresenting) was surprised by Mueller's balk.

Again the OLC didn't stop him from making a determination or criminal referral. Instead he chose to pass the buck to DOJ. DOJ made the determination for him since he passed the buck and they concluded (without taking the OLC into account) the evidence was insufficient.
Incorrect. Read the report. It details why presenting evidence in a criminal manner would be problematic in a format where there couldn't be formal charges and so couldn't be a formal defense.
 
You're just ignoring all the times in the report and in person Mueller explains that they went into this restricted from making a prosecutorial judgement.
No you're misrepresenting what the OLC says. It says nothing about making a judgment. You're ignoring the fact Mueller made a judgement on collusion/conspiracy and the OLC didn't restrict him from doing so.

Just because he couldn't indict doesn't mean he couldn't present his evidence with a criminal referral if he thought his evidence was sufficient.
 
Wrong. He clarified that they were never allowed to make a determination that a president committed a crime, not that they determined the president did commit a crime and they couldn't indict him. Mueller absolutely did not have the authority to criminally refer a president.


He didn't retract it, he clarified. See above.

He absolutely did have the right to criminally refer the President. You're trying to create something that just isn't there hoss.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT