Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: The NEW Impeachment Thread

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 03:35 PM
quote:
cyclone88, I would say that this thread is about to fall victim to the same diversions the other thread did...

I hope not. I plan to stick to impeachment in part because it is such a rare occurrence - only 3 in the entire history of the US and one that was being considered when Nixon had the good grace and humility to resign rather than distract Congress from its duties for a trial when he knew he was guilty & his trusted advisers told him they could no longer stand behind him in good conscience. I believe the current defendant fears criminal trials awaiting him in several states as well as any federal indictments under seal or he might have resigned instead of having that permanent asterisk by his name.

I couldn't care less about any 2016 candidates from either party. Knock yourselves out elsewhere if you want to beat that old news to death. If people wander off impeachment, then I'll move on.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4781
(4849 all sites)
Registered: 4/13/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 03:54 PM
quote:
quote:
cyclone88, I would say that this thread is about to fall victim to the same diversions the other thread did...

I hope not. I plan to stick to impeachment in part because it is such a rare occurrence - only 3 in the entire history of the US and one that was being considered when Nixon had the good grace and humility to resign rather than distract Congress from its duties for a trial when he knew he was guilty & his trusted advisers told him they could no longer stand behind him in good conscience. I believe the current defendant fears criminal trials awaiting him in several states as well as any federal indictments under seal or he might have resigned instead of having that permanent asterisk by his name.

I couldn't care less about any 2016 candidates from either party. Knock yourselves out elsewhere if you want to beat that old news to death. If people wander off impeachment, then I'll move on.


There's no doubt he's going to be indicted when he leaves and he knows it and so does Nancy Pelosi...

I hope you can avoid running down the rabbit hole with the sites chicken little/boy who cries wolf...

And I enjoy your educated perspective on the subject...

 

____________________
Believin' is alright just don't believe in the wrong thing....Sonny Boy Williamson

 
E-Mail User

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4976
(4993 all sites)
Registered: 11/9/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 04:26 PM
quote:
quote:
Is it possible that so many like the President solely because of the alternatives (or lack thereof) ? What other choices do voters have?

Liking someone isn't the same as having no alternatives. Accepting, putting up with, bearing up, waiting him out, or hoping there are grown-ups in the room while he's still around isn't "liking."

There is no "choice" during his term except impeachment which is underway or invoking the 25th amendment which was my choice early on. Voters can only pressure their senators to vote for rules for a fair trial & to vote according to what evidence is presented at trial.

No, these helpless victims have no choice but to cover their trucks in red flags and foam at the mouth at rallies, rather than support one of the many candidates who understand the process of law.

 

____________________
http://www.porkchopbob.com/ | http://www.brettbob.com/

 

Peach Master



Karma:
Posts: 771
(771 all sites)
Registered: 2/20/2014
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 04:41 PM
quote:
Personally, I believe voters should be given more credit than that.


I realize that many of his votes came from conservative people who vote conservative across the board, and while I think it was foolish, I don't judge their character....only their foolish decision. But his core base is a dangerous group of bad people who are a threat to decency. It's is far from normal to chant "lock her up", and far from normal to have a picture of Hillary behind bars on your assault rifle. It's far from normal for our President to ask for protestors to be punched in the face in exchange for legal fee compensation. These people are animals.

cyclone, I apologize for derailing the thread, but I do think it all ties together. This entire impeachment is about going on record for the history books, so it's as plain as day who stood up for good, and who succumbed to evil and temptation. Isn't it obvious that the Senate will acquit him in the fastest manner possible, based on Mitch's promise to align with the White House counsel? When I hear about the impeachment, I think of what the Democrats' long term plan is, because we know he's getting acquitted in the short term. I'm glad it's going on record. Backing down would've been a bad idea. But I think it's mostly symbolic.

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 04:55 PM
quote:
There's no doubt he's going to be indicted when he leaves and he knows it and so does Nancy Pelosi...

I hope you can avoid running down the rabbit hole with the sites chicken little/boy who cries wolf...

And I enjoy your educated perspective on the subject...

Like Ford, Pence can pardon federal offenses but not those pesky state offenses that await him.

Appreciate your comments; we all have a vested interest in the process. I'm interested in watching how things unfold and the machinations behind them (like Pelosi's calculations that include indictments awaiting him.) As of this second, we're to believe Iran has finished its retaliation for the distracting assassination. (I don't think the Ukrainian Boeing 737 crash in Iran was Trump's doing but no doubt conspiracy theorists are at work.) My perspective on impeachment is that he should've been impeached & there should be a trial w/witnesses (somewhere between the 3 of Clinton and 41 of Johnson) before a decision is made. Although neither Johnson's nor Clinton's impeachment resulted in removal of office, the gravity of the process was respected and the decision was considered legitimate by history. I'd like to see 3-4 GOP Senators vote on the evidence & abide by their oath to be impartial rather than deciding weeks ahead.

This is Rowland's province. I just wanted a place to talk about impeachment w/o all the other noise.



 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 05:42 PM
quote:
cyclone, I apologize for derailing the thread, but I do think it all ties together. This entire impeachment is about going on record for the history books, so it's as plain as day who stood up for good, and who succumbed to evil and temptation. Isn't it obvious that the Senate will acquit him in the fastest manner possible, based on Mitch's promise to align with the White House counsel? When I hear about the impeachment, I think of what the Democrats' long term plan is, because we know he's getting acquitted in the short term. I'm glad it's going on record. Backing down would've been a bad idea. But I think it's mostly symbolic.

Hey, it's not my thread. I was gone for 2 weeks and it seemed to have existed w/o me.

It's not symbolic to follow the constitution. It's government by the people. Neither previous trial ended in removal from office, but the articles outlined in the constitution were followed - something McConnell wants to avoid. He's getting pushback from potential witnesses like Bolton, senators who were dissed by not being informed of the planned assassination unless they were dancing at Mar-a-Lago, and senators who don't want to have their votes counted prior to the start of the trial.

For the 1st time in over 40 years, the senate is NOT made up of a majority of lawyers. There are still a lot, but they're not the majority whereas at one point, 75% were lawyers. That could mean some current senators are not as careful about constitutional considerations as their lawyer colleagues. McConnell, a lawyer himself, was targeted by 300 law professors, judges, & lawyers in private practice yesterday urging him to follow the constitution not a Man on Trial.


 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4781
(4849 all sites)
Registered: 4/13/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/8/2020 at 07:18 PM
quote:
quote:
There's no doubt he's going to be indicted when he leaves and he knows it and so does Nancy Pelosi...

I hope you can avoid running down the rabbit hole with the sites chicken little/boy who cries wolf...

And I enjoy your educated perspective on the subject...

Like Ford, Pence can pardon federal offenses but not those pesky state offenses that await him.

Appreciate your comments; we all have a vested interest in the process. I'm interested in watching how things unfold and the machinations behind them (like Pelosi's calculations that include indictments awaiting him.) As of this second, we're to believe Iran has finished its retaliation for the distracting assassination. (I don't think the Ukrainian Boeing 737 crash in Iran was Trump's doing but no doubt conspiracy theorists are at work.) My perspective on impeachment is that he should've been impeached & there should be a trial w/witnesses (somewhere between the 3 of Clinton and 41 of Johnson) before a decision is made. Although neither Johnson's nor Clinton's impeachment resulted in removal of office, the gravity of the process was respected and the decision was considered legitimate by history. I'd like to see 3-4 GOP Senators vote on the evidence & abide by their oath to be impartial rather than deciding weeks ahead.

This is Rowland's province. I just wanted a place to talk about impeachment w/o all the other noise.





People are standing around wonder what's different...they're not going to remove him...nope but when he's out of office he can't be pardoned for his crimes and that is going to be the difference for him and Nancy Pelosi knows that. So it is just a matter of time. That is what is different about him being impeached if he's removed or not. Lovely isn't it. That sick bastard is going to go to jail where he belongs with all his friends. Nancy knew all along once she slammed the gavel he's fate was sealed.

*Donald J Trump Impeached 12/19/2019 now can't be pardoned for his crimes

 

____________________
Believin' is alright just don't believe in the wrong thing....Sonny Boy Williamson

 
E-Mail User

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 11:33 AM
quote:
they're not going to remove him...nope but when he's out of office he can't be pardoned for his crimes and that is going to be the difference for him

You raise an interesting question. Trump can't be pardoned for the crimes for which he was impeached but as far as I know (& the few law journal articles I've read & scholars I've talked to casually) whether he can be pardoned for federal crimes for which he wasn't impeached is questionable. Some of the crimes - like obstruction - that Mueller passed on to federal prosecutors have the same elements as his impeachment crimes, but the HR concentrated on charging him only re Ukraine because they wanted a focused event for which they had evidence.

Nixon is looking more brilliant by the day. [These are words I'd never though I'd write back in high school.] Ford gave him a blanket pardon for ANY federal crime that might've been led to impeachment so Nixon got a complete pass because he was never impeached.

The question is if Trump is impeached & can't be pardoned for X & Y, can he be pardoned for Z? I don't know. You may be 100% correct that he can't be pardoned for ANY federal crime. I'm sure Pelosi's advisers are experts, but I think anyone thinking of DJT in prison is picturing a tough state prison rather than a federal country club.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4781
(4849 all sites)
Registered: 4/13/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 12:25 PM
quote:
quote:
they're not going to remove him...nope but when he's out of office he can't be pardoned for his crimes and that is going to be the difference for him

You raise an interesting question. Trump can't be pardoned for the crimes for which he was impeached but as far as I know (& the few law journal articles I've read & scholars I've talked to casually) whether he can be pardoned for federal crimes for which he wasn't impeached is questionable. Some of the crimes - like obstruction - that Mueller passed on to federal prosecutors have the same elements as his impeachment crimes, but the HR concentrated on charging him only re Ukraine because they wanted a focused event for which they had evidence.

Nixon is looking more brilliant by the day. [These are words I'd never though I'd write back in high school.] Ford gave him a blanket pardon for ANY federal crime that might've been led to impeachment so Nixon got a complete pass because he was never impeached.

The question is if Trump is impeached & can't be pardoned for X & Y, can he be pardoned for Z? I don't know. You may be 100% correct that he can't be pardoned for ANY federal crime. I'm sure Pelosi's advisers are experts, but I think anyone thinking of DJT in prison is picturing a tough state prison rather than a federal country club.



From my understanding is he can't be pardon for any state crimes. I'm not sure about federal. NY state will indict him and those will stick.

 

____________________
Believin' is alright just don't believe in the wrong thing....Sonny Boy Williamson

 
E-Mail User

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 12:28 PM
quote:
I'm not sure about federal.

Definitely, he can't be pardoned for state crimes and NY, NJ, and FL are 3 of who knows how many who are at least investigating him or have indicted him under seal. I think he'll be spending more time in courtrooms than golf courses after he leaves office.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6658
(6657 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 04:09 PM
quote:
quote:
I'm not sure about federal.

Definitely, he can't be pardoned for state crimes and NY, NJ, and FL are 3 of who knows how many who are at least investigating him or have indicted him under seal. I think he'll be spending more time in courtrooms than golf courses after he leaves office.


Not to sideline the thread, but along the lines of time spent on golf courses, specifically his golf courses, I heard yesterday that the Trump administration is dragging their feet about the required secret service reporting of annual expenditures. Apparently they don't like the optics of the rumored number being larger in three years (3) than what was spent on Obama security in eight (8)....

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 04:25 PM

Not to sideline the thread, but along the lines of time spent on golf courses, specifically his golf courses, I heard yesterday that the Trump administration is dragging their feet about the required secret service reporting of annual expenditures. Apparently they don't like the optics of the rumored number being larger in three years (3) than what was spent on Obama security in eight (8)....


LOL. We know DJT is obsessed w/optics. When seeing photos/vid of the crowds of Soleimani mourners I wondered whether DJT was comparing the size to to the imaginary hordes at his Inauguration.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6658
(6657 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 05:43 PM
quote:

Not to sideline the thread, but along the lines of time spent on golf courses, specifically his golf courses, I heard yesterday that the Trump administration is dragging their feet about the required secret service reporting of annual expenditures. Apparently they don't like the optics of the rumored number being larger in three years (3) than what was spent on Obama security in eight (8)....


LOL. We know DJT is obsessed w/optics. When seeing photos/vid of the crowds of Soleimani mourners I wondered whether DJT was comparing the size to to the imaginary hordes at his Inauguration.


Ha, ha...He probably was doing exactly that as he watched it on Fox News. Deep down in that twisted brain of his he was probably burning with envy as his gatherings/rallies don't come close to what we saw at Soleimani's funeral.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4336
(4342 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/9/2020 at 06:01 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
I'm not sure about federal.

Definitely, he can't be pardoned for state crimes and NY, NJ, and FL are 3 of who knows how many who are at least investigating him or have indicted him under seal. I think he'll be spending more time in courtrooms than golf courses after he leaves office.


Not to sideline the thread, but along the lines of time spent on golf courses, specifically his golf courses, I heard yesterday that the Trump administration is dragging their feet about the required secret service reporting of annual expenditures. Apparently they don't like the optics of the rumored number being larger in three years (3) than what was spent on Obama security in eight (8)....


Yes, I saw that too. If I was a Dem candidate, I'd run ads running up to the election reinforcing / exposing this. Further during the prez debates, whoever the Dem candidate is should repeatedly bring this up on stage vs Trump hammering him over & over for details exposing his unwillingness for transparency. This and also bring to national attention buckets full of emoluments violations by Trump = using his office to make money off the American taxpayers. Tell it to the public in ads and in debates & watch him turn orange.

Sorry for going off topic.

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 10:54 AM

exposing Trump's unwillingness for transparency.

No one expects transparency from Trump. If he hadn't "ordered" the 4 key witnesses to defy HR subpoenas to testify in their impeachment hearings, there wouldn't be a delay now in determining trial rules for witnesses. They would've testified & that evidence would've been on the record for the Articles of Impeachment. They would've been transmitted & the managers selected by now.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4336
(4342 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 12:02 PM
quote:

exposing Trump's unwillingness for transparency.

No one expects transparency from Trump. If he hadn't "ordered" the 4 key witnesses to defy HR subpoenas to testify in their impeachment hearings, there wouldn't be a delay now in determining trial rules for witnesses. They would've testified & that evidence would've been on the record for the Articles of Impeachment. They would've been transmitted & the managers selected by now.



True but I think a working strategy running up to the election would be to put Trump on the defensive especially on the debate stage. He likes to own the stage. So take it away from him and call him out on things that will anger him and let him dance around transparency. He doesn't get a pass just because he's Trump and no one expects that of him. Show him for who he is. If any votes are flipped then good enough.

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 01:26 PM
quote:
True but I think a working strategy running up to the election would be to put Trump on the defensive especially on the debate stage. He likes to own the stage. So take it away from him and call him out on things that will anger him and let him dance around transparency. He doesn't get a pass just because he's Trump and no one expects that of him. Show him for who he is. If any votes are flipped then good enough.

Having Bolton under oath likening the hold on Congressionally allocated money until Ukraine announced an investigation into a Trump political rival to a drug deal might've gotten some attention during the trial & maybe swung some senatorial votes so that the outcome wouldn't be unanimous on the GOP side. Voters [and the historical record] would've had sworn testimony to that effect in the Senate chamber. To me, it carries more weight than whatever is said by politicians on the debate stage.

Caveat: I haven't watched a political debate since my family crowded around to watch JFK/Nixon in black/white so I'm not the person to comment on debate strategy. No question Trump wants to own every stage, room, and photo op he wanders into.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4348
(4346 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 02:56 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I'm not sure about federal.

Definitely, he can't be pardoned for state crimes and NY, NJ, and FL are 3 of who knows how many who are at least investigating him or have indicted him under seal. I think he'll be spending more time in courtrooms than golf courses after he leaves office.


Not to sideline the thread, but along the lines of time spent on golf courses, specifically his golf courses, I heard yesterday that the Trump administration is dragging their feet about the required secret service reporting of annual expenditures. Apparently they don't like the optics of the rumored number being larger in three years (3) than what was spent on Obama security in eight (8)....


Yes, I saw that too. If I was a Dem candidate, I'd run ads running up to the election reinforcing / exposing this. Further during the prez debates, whoever the Dem candidate is should repeatedly bring this up on stage vs Trump hammering him over & over for details exposing his unwillingness for transparency. This and also bring to national attention buckets full of emoluments violations by Trump = using his office to make money off the American taxpayers. Tell it to the public in ads and in debates & watch him turn orange.

Sorry for going off topic.


Wouldn't be my strategy. Those who dislike Trump already are convinced he is a crook. Those who support him either don't care or they believe any bad thing said about him is Fake News. The only way to pick up any new voters is to explain why your policy will better benefit them than Trump's policy. Trashing Trump won't get you any new voters.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8876
(8876 all sites)
Registered: 7/18/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 03:57 PM
quote:
He doesn't get a pass just because he's Trump


The fact that he is in the White House proves this statement incorrect.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6658
(6657 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 07:01 PM
Not surprisingly, Trump announced today he would invoke "Executive Privilege" to prevent John Bolton from testifying in his impeachment trial in the Senate should Republicans vote to include witness testimony...

I'm absolutely shocked Trump would prevent Bolton from testifying as he claimed repeatedly that he's wants a fair trial....(That's sarcasm Goober, Big V)..

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4781
(4849 all sites)
Registered: 4/13/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 07:28 PM
quote:
Not surprisingly, Trump announced today he would invoke "Executive Privilege" to prevent John Bolton from testifying in his impeachment trial in the Senate should Republicans vote to include witness testimony...

I'm absolutely shocked Trump would prevent Bolton from testifying as he claimed repeatedly that he's wants a fair trial....(That's sarcasm Goober, Big V)..


They don't really need to hear what *tRump said to Bolton. They only need to know what Bolton knew and told staff to go to the lawyers about. Why he thought it was a "drug deal". Direct conversation would be great but the fact he sent his staff to the lawyers office to let them know is pretty damning evidence of what he knew and he's a lawyer.

 

____________________
Believin' is alright just don't believe in the wrong thing....Sonny Boy Williamson

 
E-Mail User

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6658
(6657 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 07:40 PM
quote:
quote:
Not surprisingly, Trump announced today he would invoke "Executive Privilege" to prevent John Bolton from testifying in his impeachment trial in the Senate should Republicans vote to include witness testimony...

I'm absolutely shocked Trump would prevent Bolton from testifying as he claimed repeatedly that he's wants a fair trial....(That's sarcasm Goober, Big V)..


They don't really need to hear what *tRump said to Bolton. They only need to know what Bolton knew and told staff to go to the lawyers about. Why he thought it was a "drug deal". Direct conversation would be great but the fact he sent his staff to the lawyers office to let them know is pretty damning evidence of what he knew and he's a lawyer.


All true. However, Bolton testifying in person, in a Senate impeachment trial, stating on live television, under oath, that Trump did what we all know he did, would undercut much of the Trump crowd's spin that Trump is innocent. Especially coming from a long-time Fox news pundit, Trump supporter, and right wing hawk....Just a theory.

[Edited on 1/11/2020 by Chain]

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 07:46 PM
quote:
Not surprisingly, Trump announced today he would invoke "Executive Privilege" to prevent John Bolton from testifying in his impeachment trial in the Senate should Republicans vote to include witness testimony...

I'm absolutely shocked Trump would prevent Bolton from testifying as he claimed repeatedly that he's wants a fair trial....(That's sarcasm Goober, Big V)..

And he's repeatedly stated that he WANTS witnesses. He just doesn't get that what he wants is irrelevant.

Executive privilege isn't absolute & both Nixon and Clinton lost their court cases re exercise of the privilege. Executive privilege is considered to have been waived if the executive discusses the topic he wants to claim is privileged. Since DJT has repeatedly discussed & tweeted about the Ukrainian quid pro quo question & described the July 25 phone call as "perfect" to anyone who'll listen, has had his personal lawyer Guiliani making the talk show rounds on the contents & context of that call, and transcripts of the call have been released there's no privilege to claim. Bolton's testimony would probably be as much about context as substance.

The man just can't stop showing his complete ignorance of how government works. He's learned some buzz words but doesn't understand their meaning.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6658
(6657 all sites)
Registered: 8/11/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 08:05 PM
quote:
quote:
Not surprisingly, Trump announced today he would invoke "Executive Privilege" to prevent John Bolton from testifying in his impeachment trial in the Senate should Republicans vote to include witness testimony...

I'm absolutely shocked Trump would prevent Bolton from testifying as he claimed repeatedly that he's wants a fair trial....(That's sarcasm Goober, Big V)..

And he's repeatedly stated that he WANTS witnesses. He just doesn't get that what he wants is irrelevant.

Executive privilege isn't absolute & both Nixon and Clinton lost their court cases re exercise of the privilege. Executive privilege is considered to have been waived if the executive discusses the topic he wants to claim is privileged. Since DJT has repeatedly discussed & tweeted about the Ukrainian quid pro quo question & described the July 25 phone call as "perfect" to anyone who'll listen, has had his personal lawyer Guiliani making the talk show rounds on the contents & context of that call, and transcripts of the call have been released there's no privilege to claim. Bolton's testimony would probably be as much about context as substance.

The man just can't stop showing his complete ignorance of how government works. He's learned some buzz words but doesn't understand their meaning.


Watching the clip with Trump and plastic face Laura Ingrahm (the Fox Network may have the finest plastic surgeon on retainer in all of broadcast news) on Trump network earlier today proclaiming that he think's it's vital for future presidents that he invoke executive privilege was quite comical. I guess we're supposed to believe that Trump is now suddenly concerned for the future of not only the presidency but the republic too....And of course Laura neglected to point out, since she's a lawyer, exactly what you stated Cyclone....Truly shocking she'd not point this out to the viewers (again, that's sarcasm Goob and Big V)...

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1066
(1066 all sites)
Registered: 11/8/2008
Status: Online

  posted on 1/10/2020 at 08:27 PM
quote:
Watching the clip with Trump and plastic face Laura Ingrahm (the Fox Network may have the finest plastic surgeon on retainer in all of broadcast news) on Trump network earlier today proclaiming that he think's it's vital for future presidents that he invoke executive privilege was quite comical. I guess we're supposed to believe that Trump is now suddenly concerned for the future of not only the presidency but the republic too....And of course Laura neglected to point out, since she's a lawyer, exactly what you stated Cyclone....Truly shocking she'd not point this out to the viewers (again, that's sarcasm Goob and Big V)...

I think there've been many instances of hilarity during this administration were they not so serious. He's had his friendly interview now & will probably send Rudy around to discuss Exec Privilege on the Sun chat shows where there might be questions.

 
<<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com