Who Cares About Trump's Affair with a Porn Star?

Jump to Last Post 201-250 of 297 discussions (1805 posts)

81
Sharlee01posted 5 years ago
"There is no proof the Deep State spied on Trump and you do not get to decide when someone is guilty or not simply by saying so."

This may shock you. But neither do you... Zany? Hillary had an illegal PC in her home. FACT She broke the law. And I needed no investigative skills to see that truth. Only had to listen to James Comey actually admit that she had an illegal PC in her home to Congress under oath. Randy, this is the truth, let it sink in. All your insults won't change that fact. You have succeeded in making me see that you have not got the ability to face even a truth. But don't worry I won't go away, I will be here to dish up the truth anytime I come across it. It's fun to tweak liberals. Insults won't scare me away they only make it more fun.

"We've decided" what a pitiful statement. Funny thing, I have made no excuses for anyone. Looks to me like I really got to you, made you very uncomfortable. Well, that is my intention. To make you uncomfortable. to make you squirm when you come close to realizing your simple insults, and all your "fluff" is just that fluff... And you know what it might be time to consider what you will say, where you will post when all your "crazy" is shoveled right back at you?
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Like you don't insult my intelligence by parroting Fox News. Don't worry. I'm not going anywhere either, Shar. I'll still keep watching Hannity to see what you're going to say though.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, you're out of your league. One can follow your comment to see you rely on the Hannity comment for anyone that you don't agree with. Very simple to follow your posts as well as your mindset. You do nothing but deflect, never addressing the subject of a given comment. You seek to insult without provocation due to being unable to defend your opinion.
  
  In regards to quoting, I actually copy and paste from the comment. So, not sure what you are referring to?
  In response to your question in regard to Hillary winning the popular vote.
  I am very aware Hillary won the popular vote. And I am also very much acquainted with the electoral college, and why it is very necessary. I suggest you become acquainted with the process. To simplify the prosses It's all about numbers and fairness. After all Randy, we would never want New York and California to have the power to dictate who will be president.
  
  You mentioned I did not address a comment I posted. My mistake. Let me repost it so no one will be confused as to who it was addressed.
  
  Randy,
  "There is no proof the Deep State spied on Trump and you do not get to decide when someone is guilty or not simply by saying so." (Quoted from a reply I received from Randy) Copied and pasted
  
  This may shock you. But neither do you... Zany? Hillary had an illegal PC in her home. FACT She broke the law. And I needed no investigative skills to see that truth. Only had to listen to James Comey actually admit that she had an illegal PC in her home to Congress under oath. Randy, this is the truth, let it sink in. All your insults won't change that fact. You have succeeded in making me see that you have not got the ability to face even a truth. But don't worry I won't go away, I will be here to dish up the truth anytime I come across it. It's fun to tweak liberals. Insults won't scare me away they only make it more fun.
  
  "We've decided" what a pitiful statement. Funny thing, I have made no excuses for anyone. Looks to me like I really got to you, made you very uncomfortable. Well, that is my intention. To make you uncomfortable. to make you squirm when you come close to realizing your simple insults, and all your "fluff" is just that fluff... And you know what it might be time to consider what you will say, where you will post when all your "crazy" is shoveled right back at you?
  reply report
  85
  Valeantposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe that headline should read... FBI, CIA, and Obama administration accused President-elect of colluding with the Russians without any form of proof. Other than what they dug up with informants that sought to intice Trump campaign aids with stories about Hillary Clinton's lost emails... And a byline to follow - And Aids Rebucked Undercovers Agents Advance.
  
  However, then the FBI used a ridiculous dossier to obtain FISA warrant on several of Trumps campaign members, without informing the court that the dossier had not been found to be true and that the Clinton campaign paid for it. To add to that if it could not get any more ridiculous the information was obtained from Russian. And then the DOJ asked for a special counsel to investigate the entire mess., which there was actually no crime to investigate. Extra Extra... Read all about it!
  reply report
  85
  Valeantposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, you're so far gone it's actually amazing. So when members of the Trump campaign team brag about getting the hack e-mails, or go overseas and actually meet with Russians during the campaign after having been under surveillance for an attempted recruitment, you see no issue with either of those things? No call for an investigation?
  
  And not sure how many times we have to walk you through the timeline. The FISA request was done two weeks prior to the election, after both Papadopolous and Page were long out of the campaign. Five months after an investigation had been begun based on the two previous instances.
  
  And the dossier's background was given to the court. Not that it started with the GOP and then was taken up by Clinton reps, but that it was political in nature. And the judge still found sufficient cause to issue the warrant, and it was renewed for cause at least one other time after that.
  
  What laws don't you want the FBI to protect, by the way? Or do you only care about the ones the GOP tells you to care about?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant it was not me that posted a ridiculous photo? I don't seek to insult you as you did me. Much of what you stated is untrue. And I m not about to even attempt to set you straight. Very weary conversing with those that just have no ability to see anything but what they please to see. Your photo speaks for my reasoning. Here is a link that clearly states what Nunes claimed in his memo that the FISA court was not advised of. My opinion, I don't think Nunes would lie in his memo. Nunes requested the documents that the FBI used to obtain the FISA warrants. As of yet, no one has the truth of what the FBI told the FISA court. So, perhaps you should not speculate? It has been reported that Nunes would be seeing documents today in a closed meeting. There are no reports as of what documents he will be privy to.
  
  http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/03/5-t … p-dossier/
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
I'm just wondering if Shar can provide the law that says Clinton having and using a private server was illegal.
reply report
1. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  There is no such law Valeant, just like most of what many Trump fans claim that have no supporting factual data to back it up, But there is something called campaign finance abuse laws which forbid campaign contributions of over a couple thousand dollars and Mr. Donny just filed a financial disclosure that indicates a mysterious payment of over $100,000 that can clearly be connected perhaps to Stormy Daniels:
  
  There's also a law which happens to be in the constitution that forbids a sitting president, yes I know he's not a real president for all intents and purposes, from collecting monetary consideration and or 'gifts' from foreign entities including our enemies which Mr. Donny accepts presumably every day via properties with his name attached: This is extremely important to prevent bribery etc:
  
  There's also a law that forbids the firing of an FBI director for corrupt intent which Donny confessed to on national television while interviewed by Lester Holt:
  
  MOREOVER, reports indicate Donny is using a private cell phone, which means it's a little easier for our enemies like Kim Jung Un to listen in on his conversations:
  reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
Laws Hillary broke? Here you go:

1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information

2.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

3.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

4.) 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records

5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations

7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States
18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television
18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States

8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Was she convicted of breaking these laws, BH?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, no she was not, she was not even charged. Questions - How do you feel about that? Is she above the law? You have accused me of being nonfactual. BH has provided facts, as have I. Who is being nonfactual? More like it who won't accept the facts? As I have mentioned all you do is deflect when faced with pure facts.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  If she broke the law then apparently all the millions spent by the right trying to convict her came to naught. Apparently the Justice Department disagreed with both you and Sharon. I'll be surprised if you guys don't deny Spanky's guilt just like you deny Hillary's innocence.
  
  Yours and Sharon"s "facts" are straight from Fox News. Say no more!
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy no they are right from Comey's mouth... Do I need to post the youtubes once again? I know it's hard for you to listen too, but please do.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  The facts you deny are black-letter law. Apparently you do not believe in the existence of black-letter law. Comey enumerated actions by Clinton that broke black-letter law. You seem to have a problem engaging with objective reality.
  reply report
2. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol: Looks like blueheron subconsciously created a list of the laws Donny Boy more than likely has violated, nothing related to Hillary though and let's just stay with the facts, Hillary is not the subject of an extensive, vitally important criminal investigation as Donny Boy, his family and associates currently are:
  
  Yup: Fraud against the United States: Fraud by wire, radio or television: Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”: Conspiracy to defraud the United States: Conspiracy to commit a federal offense: Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees:
  
  These are some of the laws and statutes Robert Mueller must be investigating as it pertains to Donny Boy, not Hillary:
  
  Let's not forget Stormy and her NDA, defamation law suits etc: When the special master has concluded her investigation of the Michael Cohen evidence confiscated by the FBI during their raid of his properties, all hell is going to break loose everywhere: If you think Spanky Trump's on a little tizzy tantrum tirade now, complaining, whining, crying and sobbing like a 3 year old girl, just wait: You ain't seen nothing yet:
  
  It's already a nightmare situation for the oval office, but what if there are films. tapes, docs, pics of Stormy or others that are unearthed during the process?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, This youtube should refresh your memory on the ways Hillary broke the law. These videos prove beyond a doubt that Hillary Clinton lied under oath, and broke several laws while doing so. Comey was very truthful in admitting Hillary broke several laws. I don't appreciate you referring to me as untruthful. I have reminded you several times I deal in facts only. You may not want to face the truth, but the truth is the truth.
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ
  
  I hope you can stay forced to listen to one more youtube. Hillary lying under oath; Hillary clearly lies under oath. She also lies about sending classified mail on her illegal server..
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8FtqzdiYFU
  reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
I'm all in favor of Mueller's endless investigation. It's made it quite clear that we have indeed had a staggering amount of election meddling, followed by an attempt to unseat a sitting president--a coup. Looks to me like some of the people involved may go to prison--though it's unusual for high-level perps to actually do any time.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Only if you believe the ex-dishwasher Hannity. You do realize he has no journalistic credentials....or do you?
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So your twofold argument is: 1. Anyone who has ever done an honest day's work cannot be considered credible, and 2. Anyone who has not been to journalism school cannot be considered credible.
  
  If you want, I could give you an extensive list of great writers and great thinkers of Western Civilization who did not have a degree in journalism. You seem to be unfamiliar with them.
  
  Gee. Touché! What brilliant arguments! I am dazzled.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You constantly refer to commenters' sources as not credible or credentialed. Instead of presenting facts and addressing facts, you denigrate sources.
  
  What this indicates is that you are incapable of independent thought, critical thinking, intellection, reason, or discernment: You simply rely on those you consider "authorities" to dictate your beliefs. (By the way, the "appeal to authority" is a well known logical fallacy.)
  
  You believe what your masters tell you to believe--often in contradiction of facts (which you dismiss out of hand where they do not conform the "authorized" views of your corporate masters' media, controlled by only five mega-corporations and a handful of billionaires) and reason.
  
  Try doing your own thinking.
  reply report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  "I suspect you're mistaken about Hillary winning the popular vote. Sure, maybe if you count the votes of illegal immigrants. "
  
  So you believe that lie Trump pulled out of his....whatever. Please, do us the honor of demonstrating your independent thought and critical thinking skills to prove that three million illegal immigrants voted for Hillary. The president's own commission was unable to accomplish this feat. Please, demonstrate how it's done. Dazzle us.
  reply report
  97
  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Much like demonstrating that Donald Trump collaborated with the Russian government to fix the election, right? All the resources of the US government can't prove it, but "independent thought and critical thinking skills" still say it's true.
  reply report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I've never said it's true. The investigation isn't over so we don't know if it's true or not. That's what the investigation is for, isn't it?
  
  Blueheron stated that she believes three million votes were cast by illegal immigrants for Hillary. I'd like to see the awesome critical thinking skills she used to come to that conclusion. I need to be educated by an independent thinker, ya know?
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Coming from a Spanky supporter that's rich, Sharon! Yes I look at peoples credentials before putting faith in their words. You should try it sometimes. And thanks for the free evaluation, I'll give it the weight it truly deserves.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, As always you deflect and insult. Sharon, Shar ... you don't discriminate. "A rose by any other name..." Why not address the substance of Sharon's comment? No matter who posted it?
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So it's my fault you don't check a person's profile to see when you're in error? Like you, I give back as good--or better--than I get. I insult no more than you do, SHAR! Do you know whom I'm speaking to now?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, does it matter which Sharon you are speaking too? You have on many occasions insulted us both. And no I actually do not, as a rule, check anyons profile that is chatting on a forum. I do check a profile if I have enjoyed a given article. It as a very simple mistake. I don't note BH had a problem with my comment?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well said, Sharon...
  reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
Well, it's true that Comey, after enumerating all the laws she had broken, let her off based on "lack of intent." (No question about whether she had broken these laws.) Many other low-level people have lost their jobs or gone to jail for these same crimes, often when they were of a much more minor nature. Hillary's criminal doings along those lines were on a stupendous scale.

By the way, YOU try getting off the hook for criminal actions--or even a traffic ticket--by claiming you had no "intent" to break the law, or run that red light.

Plus of course, there are strong indications that she had other motives than "convenience" for maintaining a "private" server. The irony is that it wasn't all that private, since I'm pretty sure everybody in the world with the smallest interest in such things had hacked it. Hence it is also ironic to speak of Russians (or whoever) gaining access to her emails. I'm pretty sure my son could have hacked that server when he was fourteen. EVERYBODY has those emails. Sad that so many were classified. (Sigh.) Easy come, easy go.

I guess I didn't mention part about how some of this material was subpoenaed and she had it destroyed AFTER it was subpoenaed. I don't know what would happen to you or me if we destroyed evidence subsequent to a subpoena, but I think a stay in the graybar motel would be involved.

High-level people--the rich and powerful-usually do get to skate.
reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
I don't follow Hannity, but your contempt for people doing honest work is duly noted. I myself have waited tables, bussed tables, worked as a carpenter's helper, washed a LOT of dishes, changed a LOT of diapers, and crawled around under houses fixing the plumbing.

I think you yourself claimed to have been employed doing something or other at one time, for a minute--which, according to your own statement, is proof you are a moron whose thoughts and opinions are perfectly valueless.
reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
If you're holding out hopes for the midterm elections, you need take a good look at the Democratic Party's platform. As best I can tell, their constituency is mainly illegal immigrants, gays, and trannies. I have nothing against gays and trannies, but you have to admit that this is not a large constituency.

Aside from that, what the Dems mainly stand for is ever-increasing taxes (look at Dem-controlled states like Illinois and California), ever-increasing regulations, and stripping Americans of their rights.

No one is really in favor of any of this--well, except for people who work for the government (directly or indirectly) or are dependent on the government. Now, admittedly, that's LOT of people. Something close to 20% of employed people now work directly for government at some level. And a huge segment of the private sector enjoys government-conferred monopolies/subsidies. This is the only reason the presidential election was as close as it was: Too many people on the payroll.

My informants tell me that the black community is disenchanted with the Democratic Party. I hear that the black community had come to despise Obama. And no wonder. Blacks were better off in 1955. I don't know that I'd go so far as to say they would vote Republican, but they're probably feeling like staying home.
reply report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  "My informants tell me.....".
  
  " I hear that.. "
  
  My, my, you're channeling dear leader's fact-gathering methods. With the same dubious results!
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I am not presenting the things I've heard as proof of anything. At one time I had quite a bit of engagement with the black community, and I still hear what the black churches and their members are saying.
  
  As a matter of objective fact, conditions for blacks deteriorated under Obama. Blacks know that. Admittedly, conditions for blacks deteriorated under Republican presidents before that. But then, conditions for both blacks and whites have been deteriorating roughly since the Viet Nam War, the most important marker of the beginning of economic deterioration being when Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971.
  
  Many people, rightly or wrongly, felt and continue to feel that Trump is taking a stand against the Beltway politicians that have been selling us all down the river for decades. Blacks as a group may not be big fans of Trump, but they are increasingly aware that the Democrats are not their friends either.
  reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
I also have to say that your cause will not win any adherents, when about half the "liberal" posts on this thread are the work of a certifiable mental defective--so shameful and disgusting that no one would want to be associated with such a person.
reply report
1. 0
  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  LOL! That was good for an early morning guffaw, though I wouldn't be surprised if the irony totally escapes you.
  
  "a certifiable mental defective--so shameful and disgusting that no one would want to be associated with such a person."
  
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe it has escaped your attention that most of the people on Hubpages are professional writers. They may or may not have had formal training in rhetoric (which could be aptly described as the rules of mental hygiene), but writing inherently disciplines the mind along the lines of the rules of rhetoric--and hence mental hygiene.
  
  People here are generally going to be about the last people you can impose on, as far as passing off Jake's shameful and disgusting gibberings as acceptable discourse. That is, unless you yourself have no standards of discourse whatsoever.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  There are clear differences between quality written work and the productions of mental defectives. But you can't tell the difference, right?
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Why are you replying to yourself, Sharon? Didn't you understand when I told you how to properly respond to a comment? Geeze!! I give up!!
  reply report
  0
  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  A Trump defender opining about acceptable standards of discourse. Too funny!
  reply report
92
blueheronposted 5 years ago
You SERIOUSLY defend Hillary? I do know some liberals, but none of them defend Hillary. Most of them found her revolting even before the election.

If you really, really want to shoot yourself in the foot, defending Hillary is a good way to go about it.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Why don't you learn how to quote people properly, Sharon? No one knows who you are responding to unless you mention a name in the comments. It's really not that difficult, even a rightwinger may be able to learn the concept.
  
  See " reply" at the bottom of this comment box? Simply click on this and not the reply to post at the bottom of the page. It would help everyone know who you're talking to.
  
  And apparently others supported Hillary as she received more popular votes than Spanky. You already knew that, didn't you?
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, I don't think anyone really cares that she failed to address the person she was talking to: blueheron is probably another individual not worthy of a response: She's Off topic, non-factual, living in the past, false comparisons on another boring predictable 'Clinton Rant' conflating a good and decent grandmother in New York like Hillary with an evil degenerate like Donny Boy who endorses old men accused of child molestation, undermines law enforcement etc:
  
  I didn't read all of her rant but I'm guessing she mentioned nothing about Stormy Daniels, her pending NDA, her defamation law suits pending, Michael Cohen's partner 'flipping' which has driven Donny Boy into a rage, and Stormy's disgrace of Donny when she coaxed him into assuming an embarrassing, compromising position while she humiliated him, at least that's what she said and there's no reason to doubt her, kind of like what Kim Jung Un is doing to him right now, playing him like a cheap $2 hillbilly fiddle:
  
  Spanky Trump is cornered and desperate to survive, everyone knows that and therefore this mentally unsound 71 year old is doing the only thing he knows how to do, lie lie lie and more lies like 'spies in his campaign' with zero evidence: He might as well just re-ignite the birther nonsense again:
  
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, and now Spanky has sent Kim a Dear John letter cancelling the summit between the two idiots. Does this mean the Nobel is out the window?
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, Nope Randy, Donny Boy will get a Prize alright, but it's gonna look something like this:
  
  The special master must be almost done with investigating and reviewing the mountain of evidence the FBI confiscated from Michael Cohen's hideaways: Will there be any pics of Stormy and Donny discovered? Tapes? Films? other matter? I'm on the edge of my seat:
  
  lol: Peekaboo Stormy, Donny sees you:
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, This youtube should refresh your memory on the ways Hillary broke the law. These videos prove beyond a doubt that Hillary Clinton lied under oath, and broke several laws while doing so. Comey was very truthful in admitting Hillary broke several laws. I don't appreciate you referring to me as untruthful. I have reminded you several times I deal in facts only. You may not want to face the truth, but the truth is the truth.
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ
  
  I hope you can stay forced to listen to one more youtube. Hillary lying under oath; Hillary clearly lies under oath. She also lies about sending classified mail on her illegal server.
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8FtqzdiYFU
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, nobody really cares, we had 100 years of right wing nut job Bengazi hearings, 100 years of whitewater crap, 100 years of whatever and and all they got the Clintons on was Bubba Bill getting his cigar lit: Now you want another 100 years of Hillary investigations for fake charges?? Really?? For what? A tax dollar waste of a distraction?
  
  How many millions should we waste on Donny Boy's grand delusions of 'Hillary Crimes' and 'Campaign Spies'? Especially considering the noose is almost complete and he'll probably be gone soon, thank God:
  
  I think you're just anxious about Stormy and sloppy Cohen 'flipping" and the Mueller criminal investigation: The special master should be almost done with investigating all the evidence that the FBI confiscated: I wonder what will emerge:
  
  So who do you think Spanky was thinking about when Melanie was in the hospital? Reminiscing about Stormy maybe? WISHING maybe?
  
  lol: Spanky T aka Mike Score back in the 80's:
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_of_Nobility_Clause
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Here we go:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opkzgLMH5MA
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, "lol, nobody really cares, we had 100 years of right wing nut job Bengazi hearings"
  
  Four American's died... Many American's cared and still do. If you watched youtubes you would have discovered just a few of Hillary Clinton's crimes. All your ranting will not change the facts.
  
  "A tax dollar waste of a distraction?" Hillary's investigation was a waste of money. Because she was set above the law in the end. The real waste of money is the Mueller investigation. But perhaps not? Someone uncovered all the BS the Obama Administration may have pulled. Just my opinion no factual info. But he just may have been the guy. LOL
  
  Your last sentences are inappropriate. Although it gives a very clear picture of your mental health.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So now you're not only a judge and lawyer, you're giving psychiatric evaluations on people you don't agree with. And yes, I am so intimidated by your great intellect. Why don't you simply tout your perfection in all thing political as horse does?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  'So now you're not only a judge and lawyer, you're giving psychiatric evaluations on people you don't agree with. lol And yes, I am so intimidated by your great intellect. roll Why don't you simply tout your perfection in all thing political as horse does?"
  
  I never claimed to be a judge or lawyer. Not sure where you would even get that idea? I am truth-oriented, and unless I stipulate it as an opinion I try to stick to reality, the facts. I regard to assessing Jakes mental statues. I am a retired Registered nurse, I spent many years working in a hospital setting, and I actually do have some education in the field of mental health. It was unkind for me to make the comment. However, sometimes one gets back what they dish out. If one is inappropriate to me, and feel they can openly insult me, they can be assured they will get back a bit of what they dished up.
  
  Not sure why you continue to bring up "Horse"? Yes it's clear he disagrees with much of what you say, he keeps it real, and civil. Unlike Jake and yourself.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You and horse have both insulted Jake and myself on several occasions, Shar. But take the high road if you like. I don't let the likes of you Spanky fans bother me in the least. You guys have some of the same attributes as your idol, unfortunately.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I may have returned insults with you as well as Jake. Just like on the playground, if a bully ignored he becomes embolden. When he is bullied back, as a rule, the bully cries... And claims they are being mistreated. You see bullies just can't see it's them who has the problem. Not the one that finally pops them in the nose. Oh, and calling names is a real bully trait... "Spanky" It's getting old.
  
  Idol? I have few idols and so far president Trump has not made that list. But you know what, if he keeps doing such a good job, he will make the list.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I too treat bullies with disdain, Shar. Even those who don't realize they fit the description. Carry on with your FTP rants, no one is stopping you.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, It's not me that insults, it's not me that can't make valid comments. It's not me that defects with glib statements. That's you.
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I don't insult ANYONE personally , If one chooses to take my political debating points as a personal insult and not an actual ideological debate point , Then they so CHOOSE to be insulted and that is not my problem .
  
  "If you can't stand the heat of the kitchen "................................? You know the old story .
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I suppose next you're gonna claim you've never had a forum ban for a personal attack, eh horse?
  
  And if you have, it was because some braindead Liberal reported you, right?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, once again a deflect and an insult... I guess I have proved my point. Consider you just got punched in the nose bully... LOL I think it's second nature for you to lash out and insult. You have nothing to add to a conversation so you try to blend in with glib insults. That's sad
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sure I have , some however are overly sensitive to ideological criticism and become easily offended , Do you know what the shrinks say about those who claim "outrage or insult , "...............
  "No one can insult you to the point of outrage or insult , they don't make you outraged or insulted , ---You CHOSE to be outraged or insulted"
  Such is likely the "outrage " of your alt -left . Me , I have thick skin.
  
  Another old friend once told me after the bartender told him to go home . "I've been kicked out of a lot nicer places "
  report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So you still claim you haven't insulted anyone? Conservative logic!
  
  And no, unlike you I haven't the reason to visit a "shrink." That explains a lot though.
  report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, Are you sure? all those cute little emojis? You might want to consider a shrink. Again insulting someone with a very old glib insult, and little emojis. Do you ever add to a conversation?
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sharlee , You will find eventually that some here are rather empty in the political intelligence department and are only here as shock jock Trump haters . You cannot debate reason in the unreasonable . They are a waste of time and belong to an ideology of selfishness and chaos.
  report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't say I visited one , I had a shrink as a friend but much like many liberals he was of the pseudo socialism or some other entitlement seeker of ideologies , unlike many here , no I don't insult people personally . Only foreign ideologies that belong elsewhere and not in America .
  report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake sorry to have to bring up the past. However Randy asked a question in regards to Hillary's innocence. No, I did not go off subject. Randy deflected the subject. Perhaps you should stay on subject, maybe even let Randy respond to the comment. The rest of your dribble is not worth responding to.
  
  Let's get you reoriented Jake. Cohen has not been charged as of yet. SD and her attorney have filed a defamation of character lawsuit against president Trump. Cohen has filed against SD for breaking her non-disclosure agreement. Which is actually a cut and dry case. I will keep you updated if anyone goes to jail... LOL
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, My apology for not addressing my comment. I find it important to correct my mistake, and I hope no one felt my comment was directed at them.
  
  Randy,
  "There is no proof the Deep State spied on Trump and you do not get to decide when someone is guilty or not simply by saying so."
  
  This may shock you. But neither do you... Zany? Hillary had an illegal PC in her home. FACT She broke the law. And I needed no investigative skills to see that truth. Only had to listen to James Comey actually admit that she had an illegal PC in her home to Congress under oath. Randy, this is the truth, let it sink in. All your insults won't change that fact. You have succeeded in making me see that you have not got the ability to face even a truth. But don't worry I won't go away, I will be here to dish up the truth anytime I come across it. It's fun to tweak liberals. Insults won't scare me away they only make it more fun.
  
  "We've decided" what a pitiful statement. Funny thing, I have made no excuses for anyone. Looks to me like I really got to you, made you very uncomfortable. Well, that is my intention. To make you uncomfortable. to make you squirm when you come close to realizing your simple insults, and all your "fluff" is just that fluff... And you know what it might be time to consider what you will say, where you will post when all your "crazy" is shoveled right back at you?
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy presents another brilliant argument! He claims he doesn't know whom I was addressing in my comment.
  
  I suspect you're mistaken about Hillary winning the popular vote. Sure, maybe if you count the votes of illegal immigrants. Wherever the vote has been audited the shoe is rather on the other foot.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  And Spanky had the largest inauguration ever right? And Mexico is going to pay for the wall? You buy into all Hannity's BS, like Spanky's other fans.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
I watched the first one, Gowdy presented a very thorough line of questioning. While the server itself is not illegal as Shar keeps insisting, the transmitting of classified info and deletion of work-related e-mails certainly were illegal.

Literally, the only defense one could make is that the Bush jr. administration did the same thing when 22 million e-mails were lost while using a private server set up through the Republican National Committee from 2003-2009 and no one was prosecuted for that instance either.

I have no problem if you want to impugn Clinton in this, but let's not act like there wasn't a GOP example of the same thing and same result. Otherwise, it's just another example of your party's gross hypocrisy. And those are really starting to add up.
reply report
1. 85
  Valeantposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Anyone hear all those conservatives worried about unsecured communications, now? Anyone? Buehler?
  
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, I hope to clarify why Hillary came into this conversation. First yes Bush and others have gone against their security clearance agreement not to use a PC for government business.
  
  I posted comments on the subject of Hillary's personal server due to being asked a question by Randy.
  
  "By the same token, did you think Hillary was innocent early on in her investigation because they didn't charge her with anything? Of course you didn't! Double standard perhaps?
  
  I answered honestly using the simplest crime I feel Hillary actually committed. Which was using not a PC but an actual private server to conduct Government business on. I will not go into the difference between a PC and a server. I used the fact that an FBI agent physically removed Hillary's server from her home. It is very true this is water under the bridge. But I answered his question. It's clear that some deflect from a given subject frequintly on this forum. I don't hesitate to answer a question when asked.
  
  I have added a good source that covers the Government expectation and laws on Government officials and personal servers. It was against the law for her have a personal server. I agree with your comment that Bush along with others in government using PC. But Hillary went the extra mile by having a person set up a personal server. https://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/a-gui … ns-emails/
  reply report
2. 97
  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Presumably Bush & crowd weren't prosecuted because it wasn't against the law when they did it. That GOP "example" can only be used to indicate a possibility of why the law was enacted, not that they did anything wrong.
  reply report
  85
  Valeantposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So the Freedom of Information Act of 1967 wasn't a law when Bush and crowd were in the White House? That's your claim?
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
I do think we should lock Jake and Horse in a room. I'd watch that reality show.
reply report
1. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, I might pay for that one myself: I've said it before and I'll say it again, I've never met a Trump fan I couldn't take, when you need a gun to protect your little self like most Trump fans apparently do, I'd assume true grit and toughness is not a strong suit or attribute: lol:
  
  I'd also pay a pretty good sum to see Joe Biden take 'ole' bone spurs' Trump behind the gym and torture him a little bit, I think Nancy Pelosi would be capable of smackin Donny around too: lol:
  
  But I'd really really like to see Stormy D get after Spanky with a magazine again: If of course she could stand the sight of that beautiful tip top masculine physique of his: lol
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Shar, you're quoting a story from the Federalist about the Nunes memo that excluded many facts related to the FISA warrant. That's absolutely classic. In the Democratic rebuttal, there was the proof that the FISA court was made aware of the political nature of the dossier. But, of course, you don't use sources to have that information, which is painfully obvious to your position.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  As I said, Fox Talking Points is all you'll get from the right, Val.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, did Hillary Clinton break the law by having and conducting classified Government business on a private server? Not a PC a server... I want to hear your answer. Not an insult, not a glib defect... Yes or no. Dare you...
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I actually did read the Democratic rebuttal. I found it vague and small important areas were redacted. So, you are telling me I should believe one over the other. The Nunes Moemo verses the Democratic rebuttal? One or the other is it? Without having the proof of the documents from the FISA court? I realize you have your opinion, but would it be wiser to once again wait until the documents are presented to the congressional committee that is once again investigating this matter? It is clear there are two conflicting stories. I am not sure your opinion means any more than mine? Is it fair for you to insult me because I don't agree to buy into innuendo? Let me walk you through a bit of truth. Mueller has found nothing to indicate the president Trump in any crime, and yet you find it very easy to condemn him. If Mueller finds something there will be plenty of time to condemn. I am not "so far gone" that I can condemn anyone without some form of evidence. And I don't ever contemplate lower my standard of intelligence to buy into the hysteria. that is going on in our country at this time. Respect my opinion, and I will respect yours...
  
  " My opinion, I don't think Nunes would lie in his memo. Nunes requested the documents that the FBI used to obtain the FISA warrants. As of yet, no one has the truth of what the FBI gave the FISA court. So, perhaps we should not speculate?"
  reply report
  85
  Valeantposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  In reading the Democratic rebuttal, the light bulb should have come on that the Nunes memo left out some key information such as the disclosure of the political nature of the dossier and the timeline of the FISA application within the last two weeks of the election, long after Page and Papadopolous were expelled from the campaign. These were on the first few pages of the Democratic rebuttal.
  
  You still parrot this spygate theme on here instead of asking why the DOJ and FBI needed to investigate these two men. You buy into the investigative process as attacks instead of a defense of the rule of law.
  
  You do seem be avoiding one big question I've asked a few times. Do you believe a campaign staff member that brags to an American ally about the campaign receiving the hacked e-mails or a campaign staff member who flies to Russia to meet with highly placed Russians during the campaign deserve to be investigated?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, To answer your question. Yes, I believe Mueller had reason to investigate any of Trump campaign members that he felt broke any form of campaign law. So far he indited 4 American's and I believe 13 Russians. It would only be speculation to predict the outcome of these men's fates or if they will provide any information that could lead to proving president Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russians to win his election. Although this is titillating and stimulates News Jocks to report innuendo and what ifs... I prefer to wait and see what Mueller actually has in his end report. In my opinion, I think it unfair to criminalize anyone before found guilty. Yes, it' s interesting to speculate, but it is not fair. I hope I have answered your question. I realize we come from different schools of thought. I will try to respect yours, please try to respect mine.
  
  Facts on the Mueller investigation thus far. Four American's have been indited by the Mueller investigation. None of were indited with campaign-related crimes.
  
  Paul Manafort Trump's former campaign manager along with his business associate Rick Gates was indicted on 12 counts in connection with Robert Mueller's probe into Russia's meddling in the 2016 U.S. election. The charges date back to 2006 which include conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, an unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading Foreign Agent Registration (FARA) statements, false statements and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign banks and financial accounts. The case was looked at in 2006 and dropped. "Manafort has since pleaded" not guilty to all charges. None of these relate to the Trump campaign.
  
  According to court documents, Michael Flynn was charged with one count of "willfully and knowingly" making false statements to the FBI. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his talks with a Russian ambassador. Flynn resigned as Trump’s national security adviser in February 2017 over revelations that he lied to Vice President Mike Pence on his communications with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak. The subject of the conversation is unknown except for unsecured leaks. I deal in fact, so find it distasteful to quote rumor. I would assume at some point the continence of the conversation that Flynn had with Kislyak will become public. Flynn accepted a plea deal and has agreed to cooperate with the FBI. Many are speculating that Flynn has information that will lead to proving that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 election. This is speculation.
  
  George Papadopoulos, a former campaign aide to Donald Trump, has pleaded guilty to lying to federal agents working for special counsel Robert Mueller as part of his investigation into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia. He claimed to have spoken with a Russian source that claimed to have“thousands of emails” on Hillary Clinton. When he approached others in the campaign with his find, he was all but ignored.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
And there goes Blueheron down the rabbit hole of false claims. Go ahead and provide us some detail on the 3 million illegal voters bused in to the polling places by Soros. So brainwashed.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  She's not alone in her belief in Spanky's lies, Val. None of his fans have a clue about his life before he ran for POTUS. If they did, they'd know he's swindled honest folk out their hard work many times, as well as, conned them into putting money into his bogus university. They don't realize his credit was so bad no banks in the US would loan him money after his bankruptcies. So where did he go for backing? They don't know this either
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  And This guy did ?
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  How many bankruptcies did Obama have, or women who claimed he assaulted them, or lawsuits against him, or lies he told while in office? And was he terrified of having to answer questions from anyone but Fox News? Why won't your idol have a news conference and answer questions like any honest president would? Answer these questions if you dare......or can!
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, First there has been no president to date that is more transparent. He keeps American's completely up to date not only on TV but social media. Well if we are comparing problems with job performance. Yes, President Trump does have bankruptcies on his work record. One would be hard-pressed to find a businessman of his standings that did not take advantage of bankruptcy laws. It is an ugly part of the business.world.
  
  Now Obama's job before he held office was that of a senator. Let's have a good look at his job performance. He was a do-nothing Senator that made sure to stay below the radar, just as he did through his term of office.
  
  New York Times - "Here are the facts: According to reports by both The New York Times and the Associated Press, Obama voted "present" 129 times as a state senator. The AP reported that Obama said the votes represented a small portion — a little more than 3 percent — of the "roughly 4,000" votes he cast as a member of the state Senate.
  
  The Illinois state Legislature allows members to vote "present" rather than "yes" or "no." The Times reported in December that "present" votes provide a way for lawmakers to voice opposition to an issue. Such votes can also help them avoid the political fall-out of voting "no":
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, as hard as they try they still can't find a bad pic of President Obama: He even looks fly when he's flying high:
  
  For anyone interested in the topic, I posted an update for Michael Avenatti at the bottom of this page: It could turn out to be devastating for the 'hallucinater in chief': He's disgusting, boring and so very predictable: Now we have the privilege of watching Spanky Trump meltdown again with a massive delusion about a 'spy' in his campaign as the repugnant republican congresspersons are complicit::
  
  Oh Boy lucky us, while the nation crumbles to the ground, this idiot is taking his fans for another ride:
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, I knew all that. I voted for his agenda. You see he had one. And plus I also knew too much about Hillary. between me and you, she outweighed him when it came to the crook facture. Just my opinion...
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Never heard Trump could not get loans from American banks? Did hear he obtained loans from Deutsche Bank due to better rates.
  
  https://www.marketwatch.com/story/donal … 2017-06-22
  reply report
59
Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago
BlueHeron's name is Sharon Vile, Shar. I was scolding her not you. I've never referred to you as Sharon, only Shar. Your mistake, not mine!
reply report
59
Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago
Tell you what SHAR, don't address me anymore and I'll do the same for you. I don't need, or want to insult your delicate and all-knowing nature.

CIAO
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy facts can really be a Bitc... Can they not. And, as a rule, CIAO is in small caps. ciao. So, you can't take fact's, and you expect me to back off? Unfortunately, as Valeant said, that just does not work. What you need to do to get rid of me is to stick to fact's and also stop with glib insults. To the intelligent, this sort of deflecting just does not "get it". We tend to want to correct and set the record straight. Yes, we realize it is very frustrating to those that don't have the ability to use common sense and just respect given facts. However, if you are going to adopt the liberal ideology get accustomed to being battered with the truth. You see those that live their lives being governed by truth, will defend it.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
I tried that once, Doesn't work.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, I am shocked. I thought we have in some cases agreed? I do respect you defend your opinions and have caught me off guard... Making me think.
  reply report
2. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  If I want to know what either Shar or Sharon thinks about anything, I'll simply listen to Hannity or Limbaugh.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Once again glib insulting remark. Perhaps I should start counting? Once again I do not get my news from Fox. You might want to check out some more reputable networks than MSNBC and CNN. Although they have certainly done their job. You are a perfect example of what becomes of the human brain after tuning in nightly to their type of propaganda.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, actually it is pretty clear you do listen to Hannity?
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
We got off to a rocky beginning, no doubt. Still waiting for an answer to the question I posed you pertaining to Page and Papadopolous. Do you feel that someone that brags to an American ally about their campaign getting the hacked e-mails and another who travels to Russia to meet high level Russians deserve to be investigated?
reply report
66
JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago
In between the nuclear bombshells the Mueller criminal investigation continues to drop on Donny Boy's empty radioactive head, Michael Avenatti continues to pursue justice for Stormy Daniels:

Breaking BIG:

http://www.newsweek.com/stormy-danielss … and-943468

In an effort to get the case to move forward, Avenatti has said in court documents that he will only seek to depose Trump during the 90-day hold.

"It is now clear that Mr. Cohen’s invocation of the 5th Amend has no bearing on our ability to depose Mr. Trump," he tweeted

After hearing this news, Mr. Trump must look like this about now:

reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Latest: FBI given wiretaps from Spanish government confirming that Trump Jr. met with Russian money launderer Torshin in May 2016 at NRA event. I'm sure the President will claim he doesn't even know Trump Jr. during his Sunday tweetstorm.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, I remember this report it broke in spring of May of 2016, it was well publicised? A Russian banker close to Vladimir Putin was being investigated I for possible money laundering give money to the National Rifle Association to support the presidential campaign of Donald Trump? And Trump Jr. was in Kentucky for some award thing and set at a table with this Russian man? I do remember news reports that depicted this Russian trying to get Trump Jr to set up a meeting between president Trump and Putin. I would think Mueller would have or is still investigating any form of money to the NRA from Russia. I now it spurred The Federal Election Commission to launch an investigation into whether Russian entities gave illegal contributions to the National Rifle. I was waiting to see what they came up with. I would think Mueller when questioning Trump Jr would have questioned him about the dinner and his conversations with this man. At any rate, this is old news. Trump Jr admitted to being at the dinner and sitting at the table with him. Not sure if the Trump/ Putin meeting stuff is true?
  
  I have not been able to find any new info on the allegation tonight? Do you have a source? I would be interested in checking the story out. If the NRA took money from a foreign country and donated it to a political campaign they have broken the law. It does make one wonder if these good old boys would do that? They would certainly know it would be the end of the organization. Seem far-fetched?
  reply report
2. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  *Breaking HUGE*: My My My:
  
  TRUMP JR. SHOULD BE 'CONCERNED:' PUTIN ALLY'S WIRETAPPED CALLS SENT TO FBI, SAYS SPANISH PROSECUTOR
  
  "Spanish prosecutor who has spearheaded investigations into Russian organised crime said wiretapped conversations involving a pro-Putin oligarch who met with Donald Trump Jr. had been sent to the FBI.
  
  In remarks reported by Yahoo News, José Grinda told the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, that Spanish police had wiretapped conversations between Alexander Torshin, a deputy governor of Russia’s Central Bank, and convicted money launderer and mafia boss Alexander Romanov."
  
  http://www.newsweek.com/trump-jr-should … ish-945753
  reply report
66
JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago
"The far right is getting very nervous"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX6ZHMHNkWI
reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Just to prove I'm not 100% partisan, one for my conservative adversaries...

reply report
1. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol: And Spanky Trump at 71 is forced to live with his conscience every day:
  
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, and one can see the years have treated him well... It would be unkind to comment on Bill may just be a bad photo. And as far it goes for Trump. I would guess he is chasing youth, I think you know what I mean. he just may be taking advantage of modern medicine, and Miss Clariol. LOL
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  If he's 'taking advantage of modern medicine' why isn't it working? It looks more like he's taking advantage of the wonderful effects of STDs:
  
  Anyway, remember the news about Michael Cohen's LLC that was reportedly used to funnel $130,000 to Stormy Daniel's Bev Hills attorney, and we discovered the very same suspicious LLC was used to funnel millions from corporations, at least one of which can be linked to Russians, into Cohen's greedy pockets we assume?
  
  Well, does anyone have any idea where all that money went and do you think some if not all was funneled into Mr. Trump's greedy pockets? Just curious:
  reply report
  63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Cohen has one heck of an IRS problem right now. Him and Manafort.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Let's not forget Spanky Trump diane: According to investigative reports and public evidence, sloppy Cohen at least up until the point when the FBI raided his properties, STILL listed himself on his E*Mail heading as and this is in paraphrase, 'personal attorney to the Trump Organization' or something close to that: That's what Spanky gets for trying to throw his personal attorney under a train:
  
  Moreover, according to public information and docs provided to a federal court, Donny Boy is really the only steady client Cohen has contracted with for the past decade or so, unless he's trying to conceal more that we don't yet know about, Russians perhaps who knows?
  
  You know what this means? It's probably going to be one of Cohen's 'flip' revelations that he was working under the ostensible or perhaps even expressed direction of Spanky Cakes: A direct connection for all these tricky transactions worth millions of dirty dollars:
  
  This I believe is one of Michael Avenatti's assertions which is very credible if you take all evidence into consideration:
  reply report
81
Sharlee01posted 5 years ago
ahoseback, Yes I quickly noted that. I await a fuse to blow. They repeat the same old same old time and time again. They can always dish out, but can't take it when shoveled back at them. They just can't comprehend sarcasm. Victory is so satisfying.
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sharlee , The obstructionists here have already forgotten their own GOOY's , "Great Obstructions of Yesterday " , you'll notice they come up with some new charge ,some vagueness when last weeks is disproven in their own media .
  
  It all reminds me of the college liberals of the 1970's , I think maybe in USC, Berkeley ? They found out and then objected to the college cafeteria people buying non- union lettuce for cafeteria meals , That became a major focus point for socialist liberal supporters of the unions to the point that the college administration order the cooks to put out TWO bowls of salad lettuce - one union lettuce bowl and one non- union lettuce bowl , right ? Few weeks later ,after the activist fad , all of the lettuce bowls weren't marked again and life continued on .
  
  Now what do you see fr the left ? " Farm to Table " where now they want local farm lettuce and not corporate lettuce on the school lunch tables --everywhere in the papers ! Oh the evolution of the left !
  
  Follow the Bouncing Ball !
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  What has been disproven in the press, horse? Clapper said some parts of the Dossier have been proven, and even better, none of it has been disproven so far. This bodes ill for Spanky and his fans in the future.
  reply report
81
Sharlee01posted 5 years ago
You had better research the yahoo story. You have stretched it way out of proportion. At any rate that is very old news, it broke in spring of 2016... Trump Jr. has been undergone two visits to Mueller, I am very sure this was discussed. At any rate, the NRA would not be involved in anything illegal... The journalist was very careful not to involve any form of mistruths. Please listen to the interview. The Dem's have nothing so as proven time and time again they dig up old ns. Very pitiful. Around and around they go when they'll stop - nobody knows. LOL

https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/wat … 2340419515
reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Sharlee - now what if these conversations had by Torshin are about what they gave the Trump campaign. If he laid out specifics in the wiretaps done on him, that's what could put Trump Jr. in trouble. Could be what the comment, 'he needs to be very worried' means in reference to what the Spanish found.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Not to mention James Clapper stated yesterday some parts of the Dossier have been proven and none of it has been disproven. This throws a monkey wrench into the Spanky supporter's claims of the Dossier being fake. Hannity won't repeat this of course, he want's his fans to stay in the dark about this.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You have committed the logical fallacy of "appeal to ignorance."
  
  "Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is either true or false because of lack or absence of evidence or proof to the contrary." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
  
  Learn to think.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You have committed the logical fallacy of "appeal to ignorance."
  
  "Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is either true or false because of lack or absence of evidence or proof to the contrary."
  
  Learn to think.
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, I listened to the entire interview and heard no such claim? Although I think if anyone could is in trouble it would be the organization NRA. If the RNA took money from a foreign entity with the sole purpose of funneling it into a political campaign it would certainly be a crime on the part of the NRA. AI also believe it would be a crime against the man that funneled the money. Would it implicate the Trump campaign? I am not convinced. It would have to be proved that the Trump campaign knew of the money coming from a foreign entity. In the interview, it was reported this Russian was a member of the NRA. So I have no idea if that makes any difference. I do know members help support the organization.
  
  Again, The Federal Election Commission to launch an investigation into whether Russian entities gave illegal contributions to the National Rifle to to support the Trump campaign. I was waiting to see what they came up with.
  
  You asked my opinion on the tapes. if the tapes have incriminating conversations with Torshin and someone from the NRA or anyone from the Trump campaign about what they gave the NRA and indicated the funds to be donated to the Trump campaign. In my opinion, I would think It would certainly be thoroughly investigated and if proved to be true. I don't think as of what I read and listen to indicates Trump Jr. Had anything to do with the funds being funneled. But the NRA would meet its end, and all involved ould deserve to be prosecuted. And if Trump Jr is proved to be involved he most certainly would also likely be prosecuted.
  
  Back in May of 2016 when the story broke, the NRA claimed it to be untrue and said they would cooperate with the Federal Election Commission. I am waiting for their findings. It will be very interesting to see the outcome.
  reply report
66
JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago
As 'Batty' Rudy Giuliani accidentally pours another gallon of gasoline on Spanky Trump's charcoal head, he admits what everyone already knew, Donny's 'spygate' delusion is just that, another pathetic, destructive haullucinogenic charade to distract attention away from his sinking ship of state: Who really cares about the country right?

'Batty' Rudy is getting ready for impeachment hearings, and if he were a real lawyer, he should also be preparing for Donny's indictment because if we still have laws in this collapsing country, this is exactly where he and his family are headed:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 … hment.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrpmv_zOa0k
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Rudy is simply trying to muddy the waters, and without much success so far. Spanky is terrified of having to testify before Mueller. No surprise there!
  reply report
  85
  Valeantposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  A very precise analogy of the way Spanky voters look at things, Val.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, The difference is there was an overwhelming amount of evidence that justified an investigation into Hillary Clinton. To start from day one. An illegal server had to be removed from her home. It progressed to finding classified emails on her server and being untruthful under oath.
  
  With Trump, there was no evidence of a crime. And still, none that we know of. One should not be investigated with a team being placed in their campaign. And that team making efforts to entice one to commit a crime. It has been reported the informant met with several Trump campaign aids months before the investigation was even started, and dangled dirt about HC as well as the lost emails of HC. Just stating news reports. I myself will hold out until the truth comes out.
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  And what has Trump been charged with? Must I have not heard? Batty? And you have accomplished what in your life?
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, I've accomplished the ability to recognize an evil corrupt mega charlatan mental case when I see one, and every time I find myself becoming shocked that some individuals still support this delusional nut job, I try to remember that even Jim Jones and Marshall Applewhite were somehow extremely successful in corrupting human minds, sending them to their doom:
  
  A slippery demonic tongue combined with susceptible individuals usually equals a catastrophe in waiting:
  
  he similarities are stunning:
  
  Judge rules Trump's motion to dismiss is DENIED and Summer Zervos' def case against Mr. Trump can move forward which includes discovery, Great news for Stormy and Michael Avenatti, very bad news for Spanky n' 'Batty' Rudy:
  
  https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/17/politics … index.html
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake I ask again - And what has Trump been charged with? Must I have not heard? Batty? And you have accomplished what in your life? Why are you deflecting from on subject to another?
  reply report
  94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Investigation is ongoing. However, an innocent person doesn't poison wells in anticipation of being found guilty.
  Also, Trump has a history of settling out of court. It goes back to the 70s.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Dan I am not sure what lawsuit you are referring to? If it is the defamation of character lawsuit that the porn star has in court., yes he may settle out of court. After all, it did appear the first time around she wanted money.
  
  Karen McDougal, the former Playboy model, filed suit in Los Angeles Superior Court, seeking the right to speak publicly about an alleged affair between her and Trump after she too took money for a non-disclosure document.
  
  Then there is Also Summer Zerosa a former contestant on The Apprentice that filed a lawsuit claiming Trump sexually assaulted her, by kissing her and groping her at a 2007 lunch date. A New York Supreme Court judge ruled that a defamation suit filed against Trump by Summer Zervos could move forward.
  
  It appears he has the right to settle any one of these lawsuits if the other party wishes to settle.
  
  I have heard of no offer fro any form of settlements on these lawsuits. So, not sure if your claim pans out that he settles these forms of lawsuits.
  reply report
  94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  The name is Dean. If you're going to attempt to prove me wrong, please pay attention to details. Secondly, I'm not referring to the recent court situation. I'm talking about the stuff that happened before he became a media sensation in the 1980s. Him and his father had had several lawsuit imposed on them. Many of it dealt with housing and rent...especially pertaining to racial discrimination. These stories never made it to the public because they were buried deep on the New York newspapers, thanks to actions by his lawyers who often settled these cases before they went to court (most of the money for payoffs from his father, of course). It's all there. You just have to do some research and look beyond the stuff that's merely there to affirm your belief.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Dean My apology for getting your name wrong. Although your comment was brief, I thought you were referring to present day? The wording "ongoing" would refer to present day, would it not?
  
  Dean - "Investigation is ongoing. However, an innocent person doesn't poison wells in anticipation of being found guilty.
  Also, Trump has a history of settling out of court. It goes back to the 70s."
  
  Also, sorry to dispute you, but all the reports in regard to his father and later president Trumps real estate business practices, as well as lawsuits that occurred, were well talked about and publicised during his campaign.
  reply report
  94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You're misconstruing what I was trying to state. The stories were buried in the back pages of the newspaper where most people wouldn't read about it (then again, they probably didn't have to do that since most people tend to read the headlines and nothing else -- that's probably why so many poorly written blogs are so popular these days. Then again, that's another story)
  Also, many of these lawsuits were settled out of court so that specific information wouldn't be disclosed to the public. Usually, these out-of-court settlements will reported in the news, but usually will be the size of a news brief. Thus, to this day, there are many of these cases that the public still doesn't have full access to. Some of these pertain to federal lawsuits that were settled . We know that it had to do with civil rights violations, but we still don't know much about the specifics of it.
  reply report
  68
  Ewentposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Not all of Trump's lawsuits are settled. He now has in addition to the Daniel's lawsuit, 3 other women, one a former Playboy bunny, he assaulted.
  
  And as for civil cases against Trump, try the 4 open cases in the southern district of NY. Trump tried to smear Schneiderman to get rid of him and instead, now he and Iskanka and Jared have a worse problem. They now have NY AG Schneiderman's assistant taking over those RICO and fraud cases.
  
  Firing people doesn't force justice to stop. It only delays it. How many more people does Trump think he can fire to stop investigations into his criminal acts?
  reply report
  94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  At last count, he was been a part of a thousand or more litigation. It's hard to keep track of all of them. In addition, some of those lawsuits have been dismissed before ever reaching the courts. Others have been thrown out of court by the judges.
  reply report
66
JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago
Gee, ABC cancels Trump lover Rosanne Barr's show: Yeah, oh boy, that's a big surprise: What did ABC expect when they hired an angry, delusional, weirdo Anti-American woman who actually embarrassed herself and the entire country when she did this: Doesn't she know only Spanky is allowed to rip the moral fiber out from under the USA, insult people, exercise misogyny and intentionally ignite racial tensions, at least until he's removed which should be forthwith once Stormy and Michael Avenatti get done with him:

I mean seriously, who in their right mind would hire an idiot Trump lover who did this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ru2BYd3c90w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrpmv_zOa0k
reply report
1. 94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I had a chance to talk to one of the writers on the original Roseanne show. He essentially stated that she did very little in terms of writing, but took the lion share of the credit. Another screenwriter I met who was familiar with her and the show stated she couldn't write herself out of a bag. Another friend, a radio host, use to call her out on her wacky and racist ideas. She ended up blocking him. Won't be shedding any tears for her.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Dean, I don't think anyone will be shedding tears for Rosanne, except of course a few racists here and there, the same brain washed individuals who are enamored with Donald: Her entire career, just like Mr. Trump's consisted of one disaster and embarrassment after the next, one racist rant and rave after the next:
  
  I'm not necessarily shocked to hear you say the word is that she was rather inept at writing and creativity in general wasn't necessarily her strong suit: Her lack of creative skills are painfully apparent in just about every interview I've ever seen of hers, not that I've seen many: Just happy to see the overwhelming majority in the USA are still sane and deplore this kind of racist retardation, the same that Mr. Trump adores:
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I would be surprised to learn that there is anyone in Hollywood who has any writing ability or creative skills.
  
  Now, I myself don't believe that ad hominems are admissible in public discourse--though there seem to be many (liberals) here who (manifestly) don't share that view.
  
  Also I'm not so sure that "the overwhelming majority in the USA...deplore...this kind of racist retardation...." What is clear is that ABC was not amused.
  
  To me it seems like ABC's response should have been the standard disclaimer about how "the views expressed by our employees are not to be construed as the views of ABC."
  reply report
  94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I'm sorry, but what does a blanket statement about writers in Hollywood and liberals "manifestly" not sharing your views on ad hominems have to do with my comments? I happen to know quite a bit about her and her reputation...pure and simple. For years she was known as someone with limited talent who managed to get by for years. She was a repeat offender, and this event was the final straw for ABC. They don't need negative publicity.
  reply report
  68
  Ewentposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well looks like you'd be wrong. There are some of the most talented script writers in Hollywood. Cons hate anyone in Hollywood. Cons have NO talent from the looks of who they put in the White House.
  
  Here is a list of some of the most famous writers in Hollywood history: Stephen King, Oliver Stone, Billy Wilder, Steven Spielberg. Shall I go on or are you embarrassed enough by your ignorant post?
  
  There's Francis Ford Coppola, Woody Allen, George "Star Wars" Lucas, Orson Welles, Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick.
  
  I do think an apology is forthcoming for trying to nullify real talent and not the FAKE script writer in the White House.
  reply report
2. 97
  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Be careful, Jake - spending your ire and rhetoric on someone other than the President is a waste, don't you think? I mean, you might run out or something!
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, Not really a waste considering the only differences I can see between Donny n' Rosie is a few years in age, a few pounds and hair color:
  
  She's the poster child for the average Trump fan and the public just rejected her, big time::
  reply report
  89
  GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  As can also be noted from Rosanne's statements, the line between satire, or humorous commentary, and being pompous and purposely insulting is often easily crossed. Neither are attractive personal attributes, and some might point to being "to full of oneself" as a reason that line is so easily dismissed.
  
  ps. I think you did get one part right; "... I don't think anyone will be shedding tears for Rosanne, except of course a few racists here and there...", but then you fell head first into the box of my first thought with your finish; "... same brain washed individuals who are enamored with Donald..."
  
  GA
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well GA, I typically avoid falling into anything but the facts still remain, Spanky Trump and disgusting roseanne are essentially cut from the same cloth, a dirty filthy remnant: One dresses up as Adolph Hitler and the other insanely retweets quotes from Benito Mussolini and despicably utters racist remarks on national television:
  
  One of the only differences I can see between the two disgraceful idiots is that Spanky Trump immediately rumbles down the road to hell when his time here on Earth expires but Rosie might, just might get a chance to repent of her evil sins before she joins him:
  
  Only brain washed individuals at this point in time could ever even think about supporting a national disgrace like Mr. Trump and his Anti-American, Russian approved agenda: If not brain washed, what kind of individual even considers supporting this racist fool?:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcklUUIsdcw
  
  Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniel's attorney is now seeking to depose Mr. Trump, just as Summer Zervos' lawyer is: A judge ruled in the Zervos case 'discovery' can move forward and in the Stormy case Avenatti must delay his deposition of Michael Cohen pending conflicting legal actions in New York where a special master is investigation all the evidence confiscated from the FBI raid of his properties, but that ruling does NOT include Mr. Trump: Let's hope we can get his testimony on the record as disingenuous as everyone expects it to be:
  
  http://www.newsweek.com/stormy-danielss … and-943468
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 5 years ago
Ever heard of frivolous law suits ?
Ever heard of the need for tort reforms ?
Ever heard of people who sue for economic gain ?
Ever heard of settling to save further costs ?
And don't you suppose people take all of the above for granted ?

I once personally new a woman who had sued every landlord she had ever had and she was thirty something years old , moved five to six times a year and never won much of anything beyond the free use of lawyers from the states she lived in . Does that make her right to sue or to settle ?
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Ever heard of lawsuits that protect the small person from cretin's like Spanky? He's settled so many because he was in the wrong, not because the lawsuits were trivial. Is there anything wrong with people suing someone who rips them off?
  reply report
  97
  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Still making statements you can't prove, Randy? Or do you have court judgments that he was "in the wrong" even though it never went to court and was never proven?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Don't forget ," He is in the wrong ..." [Trump] because liberals have determined him so and that's all it takes for them , their media , their followers , their reality .
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Are you saying he won the Trump University lawsuit, Dan?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy , you're rich and I sue you , win or lose and cost you thousands and eventually millions of dollars in attorney fees , nothing ever comes of the results by even multiple suits , wouldn't you settle ?
  Or would you be a legal hero and keep fighting ?
  Nevermind answering , I already know what you'd do .
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry to be so late in responding but I've been out for awhile.
  
  Who's paying your attorney fees in your hypothetical lawsuit, horse? If you're suing me and I'm rich, where do you get money from for the long expensive suits? I'll need to know this before giving you a concise answer. Also, am I guilty or not?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Legal Aid .
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Guilt , doesn't play into an expensive law suit, only the implied guilt .
  
  Where do I get the money ? I don't need it I have a States Legal Aid probably because I'm at or below the poverty line .
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not guilty but you're gonna sue me anyway? Go for it and we'll see how it works out for you, horse!
  
  Sorta like Spanky threatening to sue the many women he assaulted and who told about it?
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  "I'm not guilty .............................Go ahead and sue me anyway ...........",That's exactly right Randy , that's exactly what I'm telling you ! Try to keep up will you . You asked the unmistakably naive question not me . There doesn't have to be guilt or truth for a lawsuit ,only the desire to win , why else would a Porn queen sue the president than for money - What ? Her lawyer wouldn't do it without a retainer , try again on that one too !
  
  Were you born yesterday ?
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I really don't believe you're in the class of a Stormy Daniels, Horse. Nor could you attract the likes of a Michael Averatti to take your case just on contingency. Not all frivolous lawsuits attract good attorneys or actually make it to trial either.
  
  I get what you're saying, but without litigation to protect the likes of you and I against big businesses, we'd be up to our necks in unsafe food, drugs, and many other manufactured products. You see these class action lawsuits on TV all of the time seeking recompense for injuries or death caused by certain products on the market.
  
  These suits are made up of common folks who've suffered at the hands of these companies and cannot afford to take on the big companies individually. Sure, big business dislikes anyone who curtails their profits, whether they caused the problem or not. Nothing new there..
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Lawyers will take many kinds of cases on contingency, which means that the lawyer is paid by taking a percentage of the settlement. If I remember right, there are only a few types of cases that cannot legally be pursued on contingency, at least in some states. (One example, I think, is a child-support case.)
  .
  Such cases are quite common. When my daughter was in college and someone rear-ended her, the insurance company totaled out her car and offered her a ridiculous settlement. She had no money to sue, but she found an attorney who would take her case on contingency. She was able to get a substantially higher settlement, though it took about six months.
  reply report
66
JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago
Holy WoW: Breaking BIG: ******** Michael Avenatti says audio tapes exist, audio tapes exist, audio tapes exist between Mr. Trump and Michael Cohen:
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Big News... So, what is on the tapes? Has the court approved the tapes into evidence, due to the fact they are between an attorney and client? Not sure you should fall face first into innuendo it can be so disappointing when there is no there-there. Especially when the source is a "creepy porn lawyer that is knee deep in trouble himself.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well, Sharlee01, when you're desperately and hopelessly trying to defend a short timer racist that endorsed an alleged child molester for U.S. Senate, someone who actually looks like this, an old man who probably wears a rain coat and sits in the very back row of a theater when he attends, I'd be careful who I called 'creepy':
  
  Michael Avenatti is a very normal looking younger man in comparison to a cretin like Spanky Trump, some might even say he's attractive and he has predicted many things to date, he seems to have an inside line, perhaps whistle blowers who are entrusting him with critically important evidence against sloppy Cohen and as an extension, Mr. Trump:
  
  I'm still not sure how many crimes the Trump's think they can commit with impunity, but we should soon find out if we are still a country of laws while a 3rd rate dictator undermines our nation from the inside of the oval office:
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, I don't as a rule says "Holy Wow... But today I will make an exception. I have very BIG NEWS... President Trump kept yet another campaign promise today. One that Obama had also promised, but just did not do it... Might want to put your fingers in your ears, and hum.
  
  Today President Trump signed into law the "Right To Try". This new bill will allow terminally ill people to use experimental medication to seek a cure. This is so positive, and offer people hope. I was so sure you would want to hear about this wonderful new law. Not sure the network you watch will report this great news? My checklist of all the promises Trump made is getting smaller each day. I love winning
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sharlee , I believe he also deregulated some experimental medications and sped up the "trial " term process' but I'm not sure , ....My my , does the winning ever stop with Trump ?
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sharlee01, you're probably the only Trump fan on planet Earth who still believes 'Trump Campaign Promises' actually benefit Americans which they don't, his promises are destroying Americans unless of course you happen to be an elite Wall Street exec:
  
  This greedy creep and his elite pals got the gold mine promise while working Americans got the SHAFT and high gas prices:
  
  But anyway, back to skewering Donny Boy, I just watched Michael Avenatti on CNN and all I can say is WoW:
  reply report
81
Sharlee01posted 5 years ago
Yes, he did speed up the trial periods for medications. He also announced he will e making announcements on some companies cooperating with lowering medication prices. I love winning!
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Me too Sharlee! Don't get worked up over the opposition ,as winners we are in control of their own destiny . Let the losers whine away their better days over their collective singular hatred of our success . MAGA
  
  Think they will ever "get it "?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, some will. I have several friends come around as of recently. which I never thought would get over their loss. Most started out slowly and woke up to the fact that things are getting done in the country. One with a small business that was hurting has been able to revive it. Another saw her insurance rates go down... Yes, some will get over it. But some won't, Horse, they just can't? Anger is not always bad, but happy is better for your health. MAGA
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Dennis Miller said last week ; " You know there was always a reason for curtains on voting booths , .............it's no one's darned business who we vote for !"
  
  Not a bad place to return to.............;-}
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, and that's why Dennis Miller hasn't had a real job in comedy for decades:
  
  Back to the topic, Michael Avenatti, pit bull attorney, is persistent in deposing Mr. Trump for obvious reasons: What will that testimony under oath unearth? especially with 'Batty' Rudy Giuliani frantically preparing for Spanky's impeachment as he sets Donny Boy's head ablaze almost daily:
  
  With the pending mountain of damning evidence against him, only demonic intervention could possibly save him from being indicted:
  
  WoW:
  
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/national … bf32684b97
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake once again let me remind you as it stands SD has requested the court let her out of a non-disclosure agreement she made with Cohen. president Trump did not sign the agreement, and he has not admitted that he knew anything about the agreement.
  
  "Stormy Daniels’ lawyer has renewed efforts to depose President Donald Trump in the porn actress’ legal fight to invalidate a confidentiality agreement she signed days before the 2016 presidential election, according to court documents filed Thursday." WAPO
  
  Unfortunately, he will not be successful in obtaining the right to depose the president without a court order. Which will not happen, you see the facts stand, Trump's signature was not in the agreement. This "pit bull lawyer " has done nothing but get his client in deeper. He encouraged her to break a legal agreement. This is an open and closed case. And SD is the only one that will lose in the end.
  
  Just not sure why you get overly excited about such an open and shut case?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Horse, And we roll along... Winning! Unemployment stats out this morning. Another month of breaking unemployment records.
  
  Unemployment Report Beats 18-Year Low. 3.8% Trump's economy roars on.
  
  "You will get sick of winning." DJT Horse, Are you sick of winning?
  
  Once again this month the projected unemployment numbers. were beaten.. 18 year low. unemployment LOWEST ever in history Black American unemployment rate! Lowest ever Latino unemployment rate.
  
  A The promise made, A promise kept... And once again President Trump has achieved one of his campaign promises. And all this progress in a year and a half. He continues to check off problems that he promised to fix... And his list is "HUGE" list but getting smaller every day. I love being able to post such positive accomplishments made by our president, almost daily... Winning!
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sharlee , THAT is exactly what is causing the meltdown of the leftist ideology today . The left in America - - a generation raised on political entitlement ,taught that the substance of image in candidates means progress , media generated causes , academia sponsored and promoted career choices , America has not seen a tell it like it is politician since Teddy Roosevelt ! No one under forty five or so knows what a real conservative even is [Reagan ] SAY NOTHING about what a Trump candidate is .
  
  Can you imagine today's liberal having to work for a real old school boss ?
  Talk about a generation of fried egos ? Of destroyed feelings and broken hearts .............it all leads to parental supported, basement dwelling forty year olds . I hear cool things about the coming younger voters though.
  reply report
66
JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago
Sharlee01, everyone understands by now, even 'Batty' Rudy, that Mr. Trump is in substantial legal peril as he should be, it's obvious just from the mountain of damning public evidence, excluding what Mueller has which is probably another few mountains of evidence against him, so perhaps you should just calm down, take a breather, lower the heart rate and actually take a good look at the indefensible abomination that you're trying to defend, for what reason God only knows:

According to investigative reporting, Spanky Trump, while a 3rd time 'newlywed', which is an unforgivable sin in and of itself and while his new bride was pregnant with a child, shacked up for a night with a pornography actress named Stormy Daniels who said her encounter was more of a business meeting to her than anything else and while she said they did sleep together after she spanked him with a magazine while he was in a compromising position, she found him to be unattractive which is of course understandable:

Reporting indicates In 2016, just prior to the 2016 election, a payment of $130,000 was funneled though a suspicious LLC established by sloppy Cohen, Mr. Trump's attorney to a Bev. Hills attorney: The very same LLC was used to accept millions of suspicious funds from suspicious companies including an entity controlled by Russian spies: Where did all that money go?: The $130,000 was never disclosed on Donny's financial statements which is evidence of a crime, and then a couple weeks ago, approximately the same amount mysteriously popped up on his financial disclosure forms, yet evidence of another crime:

Excluding Obstruction, Conspiracy Against America, Abuse of Power, Violating the Constitution etc etc This alone is grounds for impeachment and 'Batty' Rudy knows it and that's why he's frantically preparing for the inevitable:

The Summer Zervos case against Spanky Trump was given the green light by a judge to proceed, this includes discovery which should turn out to be another disaster for Donny Boy: In the end, Michael Avenatti will indeed win because he's got the goods and Donny Boy knows it: Thank God he'll be tossed out of the oval office on his ears soon:

Up until at least the approximate time his properties were raided by the FBI, sloppy Cohen CONTINUED to use an E*Mail account with him listed as and I paraphrase, 'Attorney for the Trump Organization": Michael Avenatti published a copy as proof:

WoW:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles … -the-money
reply report
1. 63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  ROFL!
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, Thought you would like to keep up with what creepy porn lawyer is or was up to...
  Michael Avenatti reportedly pandered dem's for cash... making the rounds asking major Democratic donors for money to further his case.
  
  So sad, he is nothing but a grifter... And has no talent at it.
  reply report
81
Sharlee01posted 5 years ago
Jake the evidence you have supplied although lawsuit worthy, not actual crimes.

J _"According to investigative reporting, Spanky Trump, while a 3rd time 'newlywed', which is an unforgivable sin in and of itself and while his new bride was pregnant with a child, shacked up for a night with a pornography actress named Stormy Daniels who said her encounter was more of a business meeting to her than anything else and while she said they did sleep together after she spanked him with a magazine while he was in a compromising position, she found him to be unattractive which is of course understandable:"

SL Oh, My Jake, you need to realize extramarital affairs are not an actual crime.

Jake - " Reporting indicates In 2016, just prior to the 2016 election, a payment of $130,000 was funneled though a suspicious LLC established by sloppy Cohen, Mr. Trump's attorney to a Bev. Hills attorney: The very same LLC was used to accept millions of suspicious funds from suspicious companies including an entity controlled by Russian spies: Where did all that money go?: The $130,000 was never disclosed on Donny's financial statements which is evidence of a crime, and then a couple weeks ago, approximately the same amount mysteriously popped up on his financial disclosure forms, yet evidence of another crime"

SL none of what you listed here has been proven as of yet... "Reports indicate" None of this has been substantiated. In light of Trump listing on his 2017 financial form will go to prove he was billed by Cohen in 2017. Trump may have become aware of the pay off long after SD was paid. Making a nondisclosure agreement is legal. You don't seem to understand that. At this point, SD has broken the agreement and is clearly guilty of that. It's cut and dry. The judge actually only has to settle a punishment.

J - "Excluding Obstruction, Conspiracy Against America, Abuse of Power, Violating the Constitution etc etc This alone is grounds for impeachment and 'Batty' Rudy knows it and that's why he's frantically preparing for the inevitable:"

SL - Once again this is all innuendo. I ask you for facts?

J- "The Summer Zervos case against Spanky Trump was given the green light by a judge to proceed, this includes discovery which should turn out to be another disaster for Donny Boy: In the end, Michael Avenatti will indeed win because he's got the goods and Donny Boy knows it: Thank God he'll be tossed out of the oval office on his ears soon"

SL - Jake No crime here... or evidence of a crime. Zervos is also just a defamation lawsuit. She claims Trump called her a liar when she spoke out about it in 2016. And hate to tell you Avenati is not her lawyer?

J- Up until at least the approximate time his properties were raided by the FBI, sloppy Cohen CONTINUED to use an E*Mail account with him listed as and I paraphrase, 'Attorney for the Trump Organization": Michael Avenatti published a copy as proof:

SL - no crime as of yet here, and no evidence as of yet of a crime?

J - WOW

SL - Yeah WOW. I asked for evidence of a crime. You have not supplied one bit of eveidence.
reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
The $130,000 payment and reimbursement was not disclosed on Trump's financial forms until this year. That oversight totally was a violation of the law and was referred to the DOJ as such.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Good luck using facts to prove a point with these guys, Val.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  That's fine if Sharlee01 and the rest of the Trump Fans ignore and deny facts as a defensive mechanism against depression, but fortunately for civilization, the courts of law and the Mueller criminal investigation seem to still be very attentive to the mountain of factual evidence building and ready to erupt against Mr. Trump and his grifter family:
  
  She also doesn't seem to understand the fact that all criminals are 'un-indicted' until they are indicted: Spanky is absolutely on an intentional path of self destruction, he's terrified of the Cohen investigation which is connected to Stormy Daniels and the 'Trump Tapes' mega-bombshell was dropped yesterday ny Michael Avenatti who seems to have an inside line:
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake do you even read your comments. I have never heard of your definition of indited?
  
  "She also doesn't seem to understand the fact that all criminals are 'un-indicted' until they are indicted:"
  
  OMG Jake, are you trying for a laugh? No really? And that's your boy Randy, that's your boy. LOL
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, Sharlee01: 'indited' is for 'dits', that's why you've never heard of a definition for that word and 'indicted' is for 'Donny'
  
  Since you seem to deny all the factual evidence posted pertaining to the imminent legal danger your orange hero is in, and 'Batty' Rudy knows it that's why he's in a tizzy panic, why don't you provide proof that Donny Boy is really a legitimate president of the United States because all the public evidence seems to negate that assertion, as a matter of fact, the evidence says he's a Russian Puppet of Vladimir Putin's:
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Told you so, Jake. Never match wits with the witless!
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Oh, Randy another glib one-liner... Still waiting for those references. Yeah... Can't really respond to a comment that has substance, can you?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake you lost me? Anyone out there understands any of this? Can anyone decipher this statement?
  
  Jake wrote - "She also doesn't seem to understand the fact that all criminals are 'un-indicted' until they are indicted:"
  
  Jake "That's fine if Sharlee01 and the rest of the Trump Fans ignore and deny facts "
  
  once again what facts? You just don't use any facts to prove your point.
  reply report
  63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  These pardons are fresh meat for the Mueller investigation. Spanky is thumbing his nose at the investigation and the Justice Department. Mueller has the best lawyers money can buy and is under the purview of the Justice Department. They are watching him and strategizing.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Spanky is letting his mouth overload his a$$, Diane. Now he's claiming he didn't fire Comey for the "Russia thing" while we can watch a clip of him saying just that. He is actually the most dishonest person I have ever beheld in my very long life. And I've known a lot of liars.
  
  How can anyone with any sort of ethics or principles actually think this cretin is a good person, much less qualified for POTUS?
  reply report
  63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  He also bragged about getting rid of the "nut" job to the Russians as he gave them secret information that could have gotten people killed.
  
  Today, the NK nut job was in his office for 2+ hours. The guy is a killer AND he taught NK kids how to hack other countries. He might have been wearing special contacts or had a camera in the tip of his shoe. I know I watched too much James Bond but anything is possible when dealing with natural born killers.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Anyone by now who can't listen to Comey speak for ten minutes and determine him a grandstanding , self aggrandizing , goody two shoes , petty ,self preening ,shoe shiner , whirling dervish goof is rather blind to real human nature . I saw it from the first time he walked up to Trump wringing his hands in his giddy girly greeting fashion .
  
  "Please Mr President whatever you do , don't fire me .........."
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So you don't want to disavow my comment?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  No Randy I well backed up my comment. I provided the facts ... I can provide several other resources if needed? Your vague comment can't change facts. So sorry about that.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy I suggest you supply a resource that shows it was against the law for Trump to list the payment on his 2018 reimbursed of personal funds billed for. I have well researched the subject and proved my point. I await a response from Val, I am very sure he will be more respectful one way or the other. He will take the time to read my reply. I very much doubt you did or you would not have responded so rudely, and stuck your foot in your mouth.
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant,
  Actually, Trump was not legally required to disclose the reimbursement to Cohen. I have found several resources that confirm my statement. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) flagged that discrepancy to deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in case it is "relevant to any inquiry you may be pursuing.". Not due to any financial laws being violated. The media has certainly over the past weeks implied Trump broke the law by late reporting. This is classic Fake News. If one does some reading on the subject, one can read between the lines. Which carefully provides facts that protect the publication from a lawsuit.
  
  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trumps-fin … e-updates/
  
  "WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump reported that he reimbursed personal attorney Michael Cohen for costs apparently incurred in paying adult film star Stormy Daniels for a nondisclosure agreement, according to a federally required annual financial disclosure form released by the Office of Government Ethics on Wednesday In the interest of transparency, while not required to be disclosed as 'reportable liabilities' ... in 2016 expenses were incurred by one of Donald J. Trump's attorneys, Michael Cohen," report states. "Mr. Cohen sought reimbursement of those expenses and Mr. Trump fully reimbursed Cohen in 2017. The category of value would be $100,001 to $250,000 and the interest rate would be zero.". Business Insider Apr. 28, 2018.
  
  It is evident that president Trump did not pay Cohen expenses occurred in regards to the large payment to SD until 2017. I have heard no reports on why Cohen waited to bill Trump in 2016? I have heard all the conjecture from SD lawyer.
  
  In 2016 when Mr. Cohen paid SD it was a contract between them. She signed the document and Cohen signed the document. Cohen claimed to have taken a line of credit for a bank on his home up to $175,000 dollars. He paid SD from his own funds. He did not bill Trump until 2017, and Trump reimbursed his in May of 2017. As Trumps, personal attorney Cohen received a monthly retainer, he had no part in the campaign. Cohen stands by the fact that the contract was between two parties, Himself and SD. It would be very hard to believe Trump was not aware of the pay off of SD. He has a reputation for doing just that. It is not illegal. Now, if it could be proved the money came from campaign funds this would be a crime. But, it seems Cohn has a money trail and proof of where the money came from.
  
  So far Cohen has not been indicted for any crime. Michael Cohen, could be indicted. for possible crimes to including a federal criminal investigation into whether he committed financial fraud, possible campaign finance violations in connection to his work for Trump. He is at this point in court trying to obtain the things the FBI took from his home, office and hotel room. Cohen has one other court case. the case that involvement SD breaking her non-disclosure. agreement to speak in regards to her one night stand with Trump. It would be hard not to think he will win that case. It's open and shut, and very cut and dry. It will be interesting to see what will come from the Federal criminal investigation into his finances.
  reply report
59
Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago
I follow my own advice.
reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 5 years ago
Liberals will never debate against truths , when proven facts slap them silly they change subjects to other topics , When they are disproven there , they move on to other forum topics , When the topic is defeated there , they most likely move to other sights . How many times they go silent after days of senseless debating .

Show me a one Trump topic , I will show you ten times ten offended , outraged , trivialised , victimized liberals who spill forth rants like turkey vultures puking green bile to dispel any threat to themselves.[fact ]

Some might ask why I dislike the new- liberals so much ? Because they aren't ideologically associated with the old democratic party , the entire democratic party has been rather silently hijacked by this new left , The Sanders left , The Warren left , the Stein left ,...........All the while the rest of the mainstream left apparently silently awaits the promised entitlements .

Andrew Wilkow on Breitbart said the other day , "This country isn't polarized as much as it should be at this point ..........We must become more polarized ", Essentially saying that when "The democratic wing of the republican party sits on its fat keisters and lets a losing party beat the pants off it in legislation , in media bias , in phony cause and massive entitlement spending , IT IS WE WHO LOSE ."

That's why liberals here cannot win one debate if facts , statistics and proven honesty is used in debate . DO THAT and they disappear into the opaque shadows while arguably attempting the re-writing of our history . Continue point by point to out their hypocrisy and the first arrival at the table is their anger , every single time ! The new liberal , the new democrat goes ballistic whenever they get near any truth, fact ,
Push them to thier own shallow anger , you win !
reply report
1. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not really sure what your comment has to do with Mr. Trump's illegal activities associated with pornography actress Stormy Daniels, or her attorney Michael Avenatti's unrelenting torture of Donny Boy, but just FYI, Spanky Trump and his elite racist republican accomplices are getting crushed in special elections, on average he's losing an astounding 17% in ruby red districts as Dems 'flip' seat after seat and guess what? Racist Rags like breitbart and fox weirdo channel are two reasons why, not to mention Mr. Trump's bait and switch scams like his corporate welfare tax cut scheme where over 80% of our wealth was given to his elite Wall Street pals, or his recklessly insane provocations in the middle east which are driving gas prices through the roof: Two reasons why republicans should be hammered in NOV:
  
  WoW; Breaking BIG*******: The Trump Tapes:
  
  https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari … 4978243644
  reply report
  63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  My morning wake up dose of comedy! I can depend on you Jake! Make my day!
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You're welcome diane, after all the demonic policies, healthcare sabotaging, insane rants and raves, praises of Vladimir Putin, crazy hallucinations, racism, misogyny, lies about raising workers wages etc etc etc I think many individuals just like you all over the world will have big smiles on their faces when Mr. Trump and the rest are indicted and sent directly to prison subsequent to trial by jury:
  
  'Batty' Rudy Giuliani, weirdo extraordinaire, appears to be preparing for Mr. Trump's impeachment, and according to the mountain of public evidence so far which is growing by the day, he absolutely should be, as incompetent and strange as he is:
  
  Michael Avenatti was interviewed on CNN and MSNBC and boy, what another stunning revelation he unveiled to the public: According to his investigation and knowledge of the lower New York criminal investigation evidence compilation extracted from the raid on sloppy Cohen's properties, he said emphatically,without reservation that audio tapes do indeed exist, audio tapes exist, audio tapes exist:
  
  WoW; He also stated that at least one of these damning pieces of evidence contains recordings of sloppy Cohen and Spanky Trump: The contents of which are still unknown, secret to the world: Michael is demanding that these tapes which could make the 'Nixon Tapes' seem like child's play, depending on what they reveal, be released immediately: WoW:
  
  Breaking BIG from Newsweek:
  
  http://www.newsweek.com/michael-avenatt … act-951707
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrpmv_zOa0k
  reply report
  63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Lordy! There are tapes. I've heard some of Cohen's threats. I would think those are actionable. I'm sure what has been revealed is the tip of the iceberg.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, I have to correct a mistake in my last post to you. June 1, 2018, Today Unemployment Report Beats a 50 -Year Low. 3.8%, not 18 years... Trump's economy roars on. 50 year low... WOW
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  WOW breaking big the unemployment rates!
  
  Jake lets; have a look at the positive for a change... June 1, 2018, Today Unemployment Report Beats 18-Year Low. 3.8% Trump's economy roars on.
  Jake My question - President Trump was well known for this statement. "You will get sick of winning." Are you sick of winning?
  
  Trump's economy once again this month beats projected unemployment numbers this month... 18-year low unemployment rates WOW.! LOWEST ever in history Black American unemployment rate! Lowest ever Latino unemployment rate.
  
  One more promise made And kept... And once again President Trump has achieved one of his campaign promises. He has been in office a little over a year and a half, and he continues to check off problems that he promised to fix... And his list is "HUGE"!
  
  So Jake are you sick of winning?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, As I stated I will not discuss the Stock market with you. For very obvious reasons.
  
  And Jake this statement is ridiculous.
  "Mr. Trump caused biggest point drop in Dow Jones History on February 5 2018, that was just a few months ago: It was caused by his insane trade war threats, insane middle east thoughts and yes, insane delusionas and hallucinations, his growing legal woes which includes his pending laws suits with Stormy and Summer Zervos who now has the chance to perform 'discovery' which should uncover more scandals:"
  
  Please consider the reality of both women's lawsuits. Both women have filed Civil lawsuits. Both are simple defamation of character cases. "More or less her word against his". As a rule, if the definition can be proved, a monetary amount is awarded to the person that brought the lawsuit. Trump could actually admit he insulted their character through his attorney, and incur the fines without appearing in court. Not sure why he does not do this? So much easier. Guess he likes the fight. If one of the women have clear evidence such as a witness, Trump's lawyer would be provided any discovery. I am sure if evidence put Trump in a losing position, he will admit to the court he insulted one or both of these women. And just pay the fine.
  
  Jake Defamation; Libel; or Slander. is a “tort,” which is a civil offense. That means you can't go to jail for it, but you can be sued in civil court and made to pay money to the person that sued you. It's all that simple Jake...
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Sharlee, you quoting some drivel from the pro-Trump Business Insider isn't really factual. Let's be real. Here is the law we're referring to:

As the legal basis, the 1978 law, the Ethics in Government Act, requires candidates to report all liabilities owned to any creditor exceeding $10,000 "at any time during the preceding calendar year." Cohen's payment to Daniels — made as part of a nondisclosure agreement — was reportedly arranged days before the election. He only reported it after he was caught being in violation of said law.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, Not sure how you are justifying your opinion on the law you have given. I respect your opinion, and once again as of yet, he has not been charged with breaking the law you have provided? It would seem to me if he broke any law he would be indited? Let's face facts Mueller is trying his hardest to charge him with something. I guess once again we play the waiting game. Mueller at some point will offer up his conclusion.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant was not stating opinion, it was fact and just remember, Russian operative Paul Manifort, Mr. Trump's campaign manager wasn't indicted until he was indicted:
  
  The Mueller criminal investigation is gathering all the evidence which is growing exponentially by the day, and common sense dictates that if and when the time comes, he'll indict all within the Trump family at once to avoid another Donny Boy spastic tizzy meltdown which would jeopardize the entire investigation: He's probably in sync with the sloppy Cohen investigation as well:
  
  Still amazed that individuals continue to support this charlatan impostor who could care less about anyone but himself, but then again, weirdo Marshall Applewhite led susceptible fans to their doom and if he had the ability to corrupt minds with promises of space ship salvation, I guess even someone who looks and acts like Mr. Trump can:
  reply report
  63
  dianetrotterposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Former GOP House SPeaker John Boehner said there is no longer a Republican Party. It is a Trump Party. What happens if Trump goes down?
  
  We should not place all our hope, faith and dreams in a mere mortal. They will disappoint us every time. Be ye warned!
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Trump May 2017 to May 2018 (4.3 to 3.8 = .5).

Obama May 2012 to May 2013 (8.2 to 7.5 = .7), May 2013 to May 2014 (7.5 to 6.3 = 1.2), May 2014 to May 2015 (6.3 to 5.5 = .8), May 2015 to May 2016 (5.5 to 4.7 = .8). Yeah, lowest levels, but slower than what we saw under Obama. So one could argue this isn't really Trump's economy, but the continuation and gradual slow down of Obama's.

That's called perspective. Not as great when you consider the trend he inherited.
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  What THIS IS is a strong corporate confidence revival , beginning in oct -now 2016 after the election you saw new hirings , hiring in and of long unfilled job openings , capital investments , plant investments , added jobs ........................confidence drives the success of the system of capitalism .
  
  Confidence waned during the 8 "socialist" years . I'm surprised Obama didn't pull a Chaves and nationalize a few corporations , Exxon , BP etc.........
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, I must point out. Trump accomplished this 50-year low unemployment in a year and a half. He has broken yet another record.
  
  You have quoted many years of Obama stats that are relatively slow growth over many years. Obama's record just is not anything but unremarkable. Trump accomplished this massive job growth in a very short time. There is no one that has come close to this in the History of America. Why not give credit where it is due? Why compare Obama to Trump? It will only point out how poorly he really did. Let it go. I for one do not like to bash any president. Obama did his best. But it takes little common sense to see Trump's record so far superior to Obama's. No one knows what tomorrow will bring?
  
  I think this kind of comparison is not fair to Obama. he did his best, and it's time to stop comparing him to a president that clearly has a different way of getting things done.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
I just showed you department of labor stats that prove Obama had greater success in lowering the unemployment rates than Trump. Why compare? Because you seem to think this is all Trump's doing and are completely blind to the reality that he inherited an economy that was moving this direction.

Then you have the lady balls to say Obama had slower growth when I just proved, using stats from the government, that that is completely not the case. Unbelievable.
reply report
1. 0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Seriously ! You don't mention, I notice, the corruption of the Job market status ' numbers LIKE ALL THE OTHER Obama era corruptions . DOJ , FBI , IRS , ..............Obama's people altered the one reality of ALL previous government statistics .
  
  I noticed the immediate difference between Bush and Obama "publications " of stats and such . Listen ; There are certain factors that tell real Americans HOW they are really doing . Heating oil in winter , gas prices in summer , job opportunities , interest rates , food prices , day care, inflation , tax returns , ...................
  
  Obama O --------Trump 1
  reply report
2. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  If you do the math, you would see just what I meant. I did not want to bring that up? But you went there. Went doing your math please use not year to year but how 8 years compared to 1.5 year of growth. I would think just looking at the numbers you could have deduced how slow Obama's growth rate was? No need to insult just because you can... As I said no one knows what tomorrow will bring. Trump is moving the % at a speedy pace. Do The Math. The facts stand for themselves. These stats are from the Bureau Of Labor Records. Not sure you respect our Government websites, but I do. They keep perfect records don't skew them for political reasons. As I said in my prior comment. Why not give credit where credit is due.
  
  All the insults you can through at me will not change these figure. I tried to be civil, and not embarrass you. You opened the door to being proven wrong with facts.
  
  Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
  2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
  2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 9.0 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
  2010 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.8 9.3
  2011 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.0 9.1 9.0 9.0 9.0 8.8 8.6 8.5
  2012 8.3 8.3 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.1 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.9
  2013 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.6 7.5 7.5 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.9 6.7
  2014 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.3 6.3 6.1 6.2 6.2 5.9 5.7 5.8 5.6
  2015 5.7 5.5 5.5 5.4 5.5 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
  2016 4.9 4.9 5.0 5.0 4.7 4.9 4.9 4.9 5.0 4.9 4.6 4.7
  2017 4.8 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1
  2018 4.1 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.8 3.8 - record 50 year low....
  
  https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
You do remember that Obama inherited an economy that Bush had destroyed right? You did factor that in? You factoring in all eight years is selective memory, at best.

That's why I only used his last term. Slow growth? From January of 2017 to January of 2018, that drop is what exactly? .7 for Trump. Now go look at Obama's last term, 3 of the four years are better than that, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16.

Check gas prices recently? Almost a dollar higher than when Obama left office. Check the stock market recently? Two of the top ten worst quarters in the past ten years will be first and second quarters this year. These are Trump policies taking hold. That's the credit I'll grant him.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  It is clear Obama was having better unemployment records the last two years in office. No one could dispute that. However, I did try to point out it took him many years to get some better number. Trump, has been doing well each month bringing down unemployment. since he took office, a very short time. And hopefully will continue to do well. I watch the market daily and am pretty well educated how it fluctuates. I also can tell you Trump has deeply affected the market. This I believe is due to confidence, tax cuts, and businesses doing so much better. For market would have to go back to its pitiful 18,000 before we lost Trumps bump. Over 8,400 points. That's just a fact. Thi market is great for an investor. The market was flat during the Obama years, and this was due to lack of confidence, businesses being hurt due to ridiculous regulations, and many taking their money offshore. Under Trump so far the market is good, not only our markets but markets around the world.
  
  I guess we see things differently. The Obama years may have been good for you, but for me, they were frustrating and costly... Nonsensical...
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Not quite sure where Sharlee01 gets her flawed info, maybe infowarz, breitbart, Sean 'welfare queen' Hammity or fox fake channel, but she'd consistently inaccurate:
  
  In REALITY, President Obama presided over 7 years of positive. consistently strong jobs growth, not 2 years as Sharlee01 falsely claims: Obama's strong and steady economic performance followed his miraculous healing of the disastrous republican Bush Junior tenure which enacted the same retarded 'make the rich even richer' policies:
  
  Here's the fact based chart: The disastrous Bush tenure, which gave huge tax cuts to eilitists is in red and the blue is Obama: After one year of turbulence and healing, President Obama broke the record for consecutive month to month job growth, and Spanky Trump is now the beneficiary of that positive trend:
  
  But if we are still a land of laws, Spanky Trump's babblings, dangerously absurd hallucinations about 'spies' in his campaign, memory loss, angry racist twitter twits, misogyny, crying, whining moaning about the media being mean to him, and all the rest of his three ring circus should be moot very soon: Michael Avenatti says the FBI raid of sloppy Cohen's properties will yield audio tapes, yes, you heard correctly, AUDIO Tapes which he claims contain Donny Boy's voice which of course he'll deny up and down if deposed:
  
  The special master is almost finished with her investigation of the confiscated evidence of sloppy Cohen and then Stormy and Michael should be off to the races again, thank God:
  
  "A STORM'S a comin baby"
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qbuZJYTrT8
  
  By Toglenn - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.p … d=55030908
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, First my comment was in regards to unemployment, not the jobs report. Which actually Trump has once again broken records. My stats are from Bureau Of Labor Statistics.
  United States Department Of Labor. Please actually have a look at the chart and the website it will supply you with actual facts in regards to the subject I was discussing. It might be better if you did not respond to my posts if you have nothing constructive to say. Jake, I deal in facts, and not sure why you think by you just saying something is not factual in any respect makes you look anything but foolish?
  
  https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  lol, so unemployment and job growth are not connected?? The fact remains undisputed, President Obama miraculously fixed Bush Junior's and the lame republicans catastrophic economic failure which was based solely on massive tax cut welfare for the rich, sound familiar? And now, Spanky Trump is the beneficiary of an 8 year positive trend that President Obama ignited::
  
  Trump fans can deny the facts all day long but unfortunately for them, it doesn't magically make them disappear:
  
  But once again, it will all be moot soon, once the 'Trump Tapes' are either released to the public which they absolutely should be, or leaked by very concerned patriotic Americans, Stormy's story must be told, and although there is a growing mountain of damning criminal evidence pending jury trial and or impeachment, and 'Batty' Rudy knows it, the mega scandal Stormy incident in Lake Tahoe which also includes crimes, just might take him down BEFORE the Mueller team has that chance:
  
  Peekaboo Donny, Stormy sees you:
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Yes, it did take the economy some time to recover after Bush (with an assist from Bill Clinton's policies). Trump is doing as well as Obama was when he left office.

Again, you're not really giving Obama much credit on the stock market. When he took office, it was 7,949. When he left office it was 19,732. Since when is doubling considered flat? Like his jobs numbers, he had steady growth,

He also added regulation to ensure there wouldn't be another crash. Something the GOP Congress just undid. The two other times those regulations were undone, the market nearly crashed. Some people just don't learn from history.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I can't give Obama credit for the stock market. There were two major collapses on his time, that took a lot of money out of investors pockets.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
So in eight years, the market had two setbacks, so you can't give him credit. And we're a year and a half in and Trump's got one but his stock market is awesome. Just another example of your rose-colored glasses for the conservative party.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  They were not just setbacks they had some investors losing half of their 401 (K's). Check stats from 2011, 2015. Not sure where you got the idea I felt the Obama Market was all that bad. It was a bit flat and had two bad collapses. But all and all was fairly stable. My comment was in regards to how great it was that our unemployment is at all-time lows? I seem many want to compare Trump and Obama anytime Trump has any form of accomplishment the comparing starts. The conversation is taken off track by many deflect the conversation.? The economy is a very complicated subject, not one that can be easily discussed on a chat.
  
  My original comment was made to point out our president was making good on one of his campaign promises. Not to compare his accomplishments to Obama's accomplishments. The conversation was immediately highjacked. to a "pissing contest". From here out, I will stick to the subject, and respond to the subject. Unfortunately, I do not have l"lady balls' as you have accused me of having. I unlike many do my thinking with my brain, not a dangling body part... How about this month's fabulous unemployment numbers? 50 year low...
  
  http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/24/investi … index.html
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry Sharlee01, but once again the facts are the facts:
  
  Mr. Trump caused biggest point drop in Dow Jones History on February 5 2018, that was just a few months ago: It was caused by his insane trade war threats, insane middle east thoughts and yes, insane delusionas and hallucinations, his growing legal woes which includes his pending laws suits with Stormy and Summer Zervos who now has the chance to perform 'discovery' which should uncover more scandals:
  
  Updated at 4:55 p.m. ET
  
  "The stock market went on a wild ride again on Monday, with the Dow Jones industrial average closing down 1,175 points, its worst point drop in history. The Dow closed down 4.6 percent and turned negative for the year.
  
  At one point Monday afternoon, the Dow was down 1,579 points — the largest intraday point drop in the history of the index.
  
  "Investors were dumping out of stocks," NPR's Uri Berliner reports. "They were in free fall, something we've seen very little of during the steady bull market since basically 2009. And now we're seeing nerves in the market — some fear."
  
  The previous largest point drop for the Dow was 778 points in September 2008, in the midst of the financial crisis."
  
  https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way … t-the-open
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Interesting that today as a cause for this topic , liberals are all of a sudden involved in the protectionism and in love with wall street ?
  
  Whatever happened to Occupy ?
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't realize only conservatives invested in the stock market, horse!
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  The old saying goes " When Wall Streets happy the rest of America is sad "
  or some such thing ........Can't have it all dude .
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
The data is definitely legit. The way you interpret it to think Obama did a poor job economically is where the flaw lies.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Not sure what more I can say. I called his economy flat. The numbers don't lie. His employment numbers were improving his last two years. I also admitted he came into an economic mess. Do you realize there has not been any form of pay raises in many years? Last month showed wages going up 1$. This does not sound like much but it is starting to move... I can say the Obama economy was good. It was very flat, unemployment numbers prove that. I don't feel we should compare Trump and Obama it seems unfair.
  
  My original comment was not meant to make a comparison but to point out that the president is keeping campaign promises. And a very positive report on "our" unemployment status. I was hoping to hear more positive comments. Because this is positive for all of us. But as usual, the comparing the two presidents began. The subject has been deflected in all directions.
  
  Did I become defensive, yes in some comments I did? You see I do have an opinion on the subject. Did I insult with nasty innuendos? No. Was I battered with nasty personal insults? Yes...
  
  My Mom taught me something. When people resort to changing the subject, becoming overly insulting, consider you won... But it' not about winning, it's about being able to have a decent conversation, respectful of others opinions.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well Sharlee01, the facts don't lie and unfortunately for Trump fans, President Obama is responsible for about 10 inches on this 8 year unemployment chart while Donny Boy might get credit for about the last inch:
  
  Seems appropriate and Stormy Daniels claims to be well aware of Donny's generic stature and given the following short film, it looks like Melanie is aware of it as well and won't even hold his tiny little hands anymore, and can you blame her? What kind of heebee geebees and siffy wiffys are roaming around on those unsanitary mitts:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAWMneAce0Q
  
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Notice the incredible arc in your own chart ?
  
  Why did that happen ? Let me explain , because corporate confidence took such a nose dive with the Obama coronation and never recovered till Trumps campaign , 2014 -2016 Corporate America's confidence returned knowing full well Clinton was hanging herself , Obama couldn't care less and Trump was clearing away the garbage candidates on both sides !
  
  Nice chart though , Sometimes liberals and their OWN charts just can't agree !
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not convinced you're reading the chart correctly, maybe you should try again but that's not the main topic of this forum, I just posted it to prove Trump fans wrong about their inaccurate claims:
  
  This forum is actually about Stormy Daniel's and her one night stand with Donny Spank Boy, the subsequent cover up, payment of $130,000 in hush money from his personal attorney to a Bev Hills lawyer, and the catastrophic legal and political mess it's causing for soon to be REMOVED Mr. Trump and his republican accomplices in congress::
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Explain to us all Jake how a rich guy --porn star romp in the hay is illegal , impeachable and what , a liberal sin among sins ?
  
  You never did that Jake.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So Obama was throwing cash at a crashing economy ,2008,09,10 but unemployment grew to 10 % ---Your chart Jake ! ........Guess those free cellphones didn't save the economy , welfare increases , stimulus $ , or did he just forget about the black teen age unemployment of 55 % and black men of 23 % ?
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Just FYI ahroseback: The Bush Junior economy was imploding on the verge of a great depression due to his corporate welfare tax cut scheme when President Obama was inaugurated and no matter how Trump fans try desperately to spin it, it was nothing less than a miracle that Obama managed to turn it around and create one of the greatest economic successes in history, a success that inept, corrupt self absorbed Donny Boy inherited:
  
  But we all know you're just trying to divert the subject away from Donny's immense legal troubles caused by his adulterous one night stand with Stormy Baby who said he was unattractive and 'generic' which is obvious to any human being with two healthy eye balls:
  
  And if you watch that video I posted previously, it looks like even Melanie is repulsed by the thought of touching him, I guess she agrees with Stormy:
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Come on Jake , Explain the law that says , No man shall have any kind of an affair with a porn star , cash or charge ,check or acct. lest he be guilty of .........................................., Law statute #...........................................?
  I guess you forgot .
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  "But we all know you're just trying to divert the subject away from Donny's immense legal troubles caused by his adulterous one night stand with Stormy Baby who said he was unattractive and 'generic' which is obvious to any human being with two healthy eye ball"
  
  Jake what immense legal troubles?
  
  Once again let me school you in president Trump's legal problems. They are civil cases...
  Please consider the reality of both women's lawsuits. Both women have filed Civil lawsuits. Both are simple defamation of character cases. "More or less her word against his". As a rule, if the definition can be proved, a monetary amount is awarded to the person that brought the lawsuit. Trump could actually admit he insulted their character through his attorney, and incur the fines without appearing in court. Not sure why he does not do this? So much easier. Guess he likes the fight. If one of the women have clear evidence such as a witness, Trump's lawyer would be provided any discovery. I am sure if evidence put Trump in a losing position, he will admit to the court he insulted one or both of these women. And just pay the fine.
  
  Jake Defamation; Libel; or Slander. is a “tort,” which is a civil offense. That means you can't go to jail for it, but you can be sued in civil court and made to pay money to the person that sued you. It's all that simple Jake
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, Once again let me school you in president Trump's legal problems. They are civil cases...
  Please consider the reality of both women's lawsuits. Both women have filed Civil lawsuits. Both are simple defamation of character cases. "More or less her word against his". As a rule, if the definition can be proved, a monetary amount is awarded to the person that brought the lawsuit. Trump could actually admit he insulted their character through his attorney, and incur the fines without appearing in court. Not sure why he does not do this? So much easier. Guess he likes the fight. If one of the women have clear evidence such as a witness, Trump's lawyer would be provided any discovery. I am sure if evidence put Trump in a losing position, he will admit to the court he insulted one or both of these women. And just pay the fine.
  
  Jake Defamation; Libel; or Slander. is a “tort,” which is a civil offense. That means you can't go to jail for it, but you can be sued in civil court and made to pay money to the person that sued you. It's all that simple Jake.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, I am shocked you would post this chart? We have just had 7.2 years of some of the highest unemployment numbers we have had in many years. When Trump won is when these numbers started to go down due to confidence and knew he would be doing away with Obama's regulations as well as tax relief.
  Few other presidents have had as bad of unemployment record as Obama in over a half-century. the list is short. Reagan, Ford, Carter, Clinton, Bush, and Obama share the spotlight.
  I have provided a good link that has stats galore, Stats do not lie or make excuses.
  
  Jake, you sound foolish study the charts, and you will see just how badly Obama's economy was. And how great president Trump is doing at correcting the problem.
  
  https://historyinpieces.com/research/us … -president
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well Sharlee01, All I can say is that the chart I posted reveals President Obama had about 10 inches of positive jobs growth while your hero who could care less about you or your family, had maybe an inch if he's lucky:
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake do you know how to read a chart? 10 inches? That ten inch stands for 6.5 years of abominable unemployment? Trump's 1 inch stands for record-breaking low unemployment. Let me make this simple. One could have 6 and a half very tiny rotted green apples or two overly large perfect red apples. Which would you prefer?
  
  Please have a good look at my last post to you. It has charts on previous presidents and their economic history. Perhaps it's time to agree to disagree. Stats don't lie Jake.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  What some Trump fans don't seem to understand is the fact that President Obama's 10 inches of lengthy, positive unemployment / job growth made Generic Donny Dump's 1 inch possible:
  
  Without the lengthy strength of Obama for 8 years, the Dumpster's tiny diminutive contribution doesn't exist:
  
  Just ask Stormy and Melanie, they seems to be more educated on the subject than most Trump fans: BTW, I'm familiar with torts, tweets, tarts and torture Michael Avenatti is putting your orange hallucinating hero and his 'Batty' attorneys through, and the ending should be anything but pretty for them considering the mountain of damning evidence against Donny Boy we've already seen:
  
  Peekaboo Donny, Stormy sees you:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGH_16SICL0
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I won't go any further explaining how to read a chart. But one does not need a ruler.
  What do you not understand about the civil lawsuit Stormy has filed against the president. I have copy and pasted a lengthy tutorial on defamation and it's punishment. If rump losses he will pay a fine.
  
  Now Cohen's case against SD is a bit different. She broke a legal promise not to speak of her affair with President Trump. She took the money and sealed that agreement. Her punishment will be the same Trump would get if she wins her defamation case against She will be fined. The difference Cohns case can be well proved with evidence. This woman blabbed on several networks. Oh, there is one more difference. Trump is rich, and won't miss the money. Now SD she will be pedaling her wares for some time to come up with what she will end up owing Cohen. I think SD should have listened to her first lawyer. he suggested she file to be relieved of the binding contract. Then tell her story. But alas creepy porn guy talks her into breaking her contract for some bit of interview cash. LOL
  
  I won't be repeating this again. I am feeling a bit mean-spirited.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
When you claim it's 'Trump's Economy' as you did, many of us will call bs on a claim like that. Growth and decreasing unemployment have been a trend for some time now. This is simply a continuation of an already strong economy.
reply report
59
Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago
What do you guys not understand about campaign violations? Jake and others have explained simply enough for a small child to understand. Perhaps wilderness can use his crayons and talent to color y'all a picture which will make it clear enough for even you guys!
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Randy, Funny you bring that up... Because I have asked over and over and over... What has campaign violations president Trump been charged with? All I have seen posted here are inuendoes of violations that in no way even hold water. Not even sure why you would post such a comment?
  reply report
  97
  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  C'mon, Sharlee - everyone knows Trump and Putin conspired together to fix the election!
  
  And didn't I hear where every international Trump property had a ballot box there so foreign citizens could vote in our election? And that he hired 10,000 hackers to hack into the voting system and change poor Hillary's votes to Trump instead? I rather think he had Martians voting in our election as well.
  
  All these are "common knowledge" and "common sense" (with the common factor being severe TDS).
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  And you guys are suffering from FTP, Dan. Sean tells you what to think!
  reply report
  97
  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  What?!?! The Big Investigation wasn't about Trump/Putin collusion? I'm pretty sure that was the claim a few months ago...and that you among others were repeating it as an absolute truth.
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Not really, Dan. I said you guys didn't know what Mueller has found to date. And you still don't. I don't know what he's found either, but I do have suspicions. Yes, it's only coincidence so many of Spanky's cronies and family happened to run into them.
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Wilderness, Yes all so very true. Myself I voted 388 times walk in and 457 mail in's. It was difficult but had to be done. I knew Putin and Trump just would not be able to pull it off on their own. I mean with Hillary campaigning so very hard, and leading in the polls. Not to mention all the great press she received.
  
  And then there were her almost daily rallies, and giving interviews non-stop. And then there was her progressive agenda. Oh no, that was Trump. She was the one calling citizens deplorable, and her husband was out there giving speeches bashing "Obamacare". LOL
  
  Yes, there was definitely tons of obstruction, collusion. hacking and lots of other really bad things. If you need proof just read Hillary Clinton book. At this point, I must borrow a line from Nacey Pelosi. The book gave me a "giggle fit"...
  
  It well appears some will never come to the realization that their candidate lost. That it's just time to move on or will they continue to flounder around in their self-righteousness throughout president Trumps two terms in office?
  reply report
0
ahorsebackposted 5 years ago
Separate Question ;
There is and has been much discussion about whether Trump as the US President in the highest office in the land can Actually Pardon himself OR actually even BE impeached for anything POLITICALLY motivated . Many in the constitutional law are arguing this very scenario . Just simply because of politics, it is essentially used as an example that the president could commit murder in the white house and get away with it ?

Why do you think it took so much to impeach Clinton and then only after he served two terms , political motivations are rather trivial to such cause?
reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
Not so much a discussion as Trump's people trying to argue that angle, and failing in the eyes of past precedent.
reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
But it's funny that the Democrats want to run on a platform of jobs during the midterms. Jobs hasn't been an issue for at least four years now.

The point that ahorseback brings up should be the platform. One of accountability to our laws. That's what they need to run on, because the more Trump and his people speak, the more obvious it becomes he wants to become a dictator.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Are you really suggesting the Dem's run on the platform of the accountability of law? I admit it would be wonderful if they continue running on with job creation or employment, and raising taxes as they have been talking about. But it would be beyond a dream of mine if they run on accountability of law. All of the above will certainly show as always the Dem's have no platform. They borrow Trump's jobs platform. Day late dollar short. They clearly sound crazy in regards to raising taxes. And the accountability to the law, that's laughable. The entire Obama administration is under investigation for not only how they handled the Clinton investigation, but for infiltrating Trump's campaign trying to literally intrap campaign aids. Let me count ways... No, I don't have the want or the time.
  
  Let me remind you, president Trump has been charged with no form of indiscretion or crime. Hopefully, the Dems will use one or all of the above for their platforms. It will be fun to watch. To borrow a Nancy Pelosi's term it will be " giggle fit".
  
  In regards to our president being a dictator. That is insulting and ridiculous. He is clearly working daily to solve big and small problems for all Americans. He has been doing a wonderful job. Sad that you can't see that.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  If you consider giving trillions more of our money to filthy rich elitists who send it to foreign lands, sabotaging children's healthcare, inciting trade wars which will bankrupt his own gullible voters and covering up campaign crimes and sinful adulterous one night stands with his partner and personal lawyer Michael Cohen who should very soon be indicted a wonderful job by Spanky Trump, then yes, so be it:
  
  Stormy 'spanks and humiliates' Spanky, the new prison sitcom:
  
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I have no problem with two consenting adults having relations. I don't condone adultery, but it has been around from the beginning of time. I have a bit more trouble when one has to be paid to keep her mouth shut after having one night stand. Very low character. But then look what she does for a living, and she more or less committed blackmail by asking for money to keep her mouth shut. I hope she gets a huge fine for breaking her non-disclosure agreement.
  reply report
  0
  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Only for the American left could the possibility of taking down a sitting U.S president by a porn star and a cheap lawyer be so somehow shocking when it fails , We've seen the Kennedy's , The Clintons , the # Me Too movement , Hollywood's "Gimme sex for making you stars ."................
  
  Yet the left wants us all to what ? Wring our hands in disgust ?
  
  We've seen much worse from the left in the past including oral sex in the White house coat rooms , But you want traditional Americans to what ? become enraged at the shocking allegations ?
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Horse, Let's not forget Old Bill using a cigar as a sex toy on Monica hen sucking on it. Bill has a very ugly list of sexually abusing women. Not a pretty picture. Or how about good old Ted Kennedy leaving a woman to drown in a car. Not sure how some believe a civil defamation case could cause president Trump any inconvenience. Perhaps a fine?
  
  The left just doesn't have the ability to decipher fact from fiction. They hold onto a ridiculous theory that this Stormy whoever... can put the president in prison. They don't seem to understand one has to be charged with a crime, not a civil misdemeanor to get jail time. Plus, by now it should have hit them between the eyes that we all knew about Trump's womanizing long before the election? Yes, they are up on their haunches and are acting incensed by Trump sleeping around. I have figured something out about liberals. Liberals are caught in a circle of hysteria. They start with the Russian ruining the election for them. Although, they can't say why or how the Russians ruined it? Then they move onto Mueller's investigation that has not produced the outcome they had hoped for, the demise of Trump or evidence that Trump committed any crime. And let's not forget their latest accusation they have hung their hopes on. The two ridiculous defamation civil cases filed by women that claim he called them "Liars". It's the lefts last hope to bring Trump to justice...
  
  The only thing that has me wring my hands in disgust, is the fact that I had to face the fact the left has have gone off the deep end. And we now have to deal with every form of crazy.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  And Donny Boy hoodwinked Stormy into a one night stand by promising her a spot on his crappy program which never materialized, Donny also shacked up with her while her newlywed was pregnant with Lord Barron of the York: What does that say about Donny Boy's character? Not to mention she was in her twenties when it happened and a case for rape could probably be made:
  
  Then Mr. Trump's personal attorney paid her $130, 000 hush money just before the election because he wanted to deceive voters by keeping this a secret, then he never disclosed it on his financial forms: Nice character:
  
  BTW, a judge will never ever give corrupt Spanky n' Cohen a penny for that invalid NDA which Donny never signed:
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake the Apprentice was on for 15 seasons, won many awards and spun off four related shows. Not sure I would call that a "crappy program"? It is pretty clear the show was entertaining or it would not have had such a run.
  
  "hoodwinked Stormy" that speaks to her character. I guess you could surmise she would do just about anything for money or in this case to be part of a TV show. Let me correct something. It was not shacking up, she claimed it was a one night stand.
  
  "What does that say about Donny Boy's character?" What does it say about her character? Does not bode well for a defamation case. LOL
  
  "Not to mention she was in her twenties when it happened and a case for rape could probably be made:"
  OMG She was 28, how stupid to even go there? She has spilled her guts all over TV that the sex was consensual.
  
  "Then Mr. Trump's personal attorney paid her $130, 000 hush money just before the election because he wanted to deceive voters by keeping this a secret,"
  
  yeah like we did not know about Trump's womanizing he was married three times and then there was the Bily Bush tape. Yeah, we sure would have been shocked that he slept around with pros.
  
  "BTW, a judge will never ever give corrupt Spanky n' Cohen a penny for that invalid NDA which Donny never signed:"
  
  Really, I guess we will have to wait and see. It is an open and shut case. The proof is on Cohen's side, h can produce her breaking the agreement on TV. You don't seem to understand civil cases. A judge reads filings and hears both sides, and bingo hands down a judgment. Which is the case of defamation a reward of cash? And you are right Trump did not sign it and did not pay Cohen until 2018 when he was billed... LOL Might indicate he did not know about the payment?
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yup Sharlee01, it's 'open and shut' alright, and then tossed right into the Potomac where it belongs:
  
  It's a moot point for 'Spanky n' Cohen' anyway, what could they possibly spend a million dollars on in prison? New wigs? rapid fire propecia shots? Greasy KFC Buckets? Pen Protection from 'Bubba', the big dude who doesn't take too kindly to 71 year old elderly men who cuddle up to child molesters?
  
  Sound eeeeeeerily familiar?:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMt8qCl5fPk
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake, you should definitely keep posting. I have never seen written material of any kind, anywhere, whose revolting and nonsensical ravings offered so much insight into liberalism.
  
  You should consider blogging about how to get a disability check for a mental disability of some kind. Your posts offer many examples of how best to fill out the forms: Liberal use of name-calling ("asshole" is highly recommended) of all former associates, and extensive fantasy material indicating a clear break from reality. If this strategy doesn't get you a monthly check, it will get you three hots and a cot--albeit involving some loss of personal freedom, but it's not like anyone cares about that.
  
  You seem to know a lot about this. You could definitely make some money offering advice on this subject.
  reply report
  66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Well blueheron, the strong, expanding obstructing resistance and the overwhelming majority of good, righteous and Christian global citizens know it's very close to judgement day for Spanky Trump when all we get from right wing complicit Trump fans are petty personal attacks like the one you've just posted:
  
  But I understand, it takes way too much energy to keep up with and desperately try to defend the nonstop, unrelenting indefensible evil doings of the Trump family: There exists a tiny yet rabidly loyal group of dedicated fans who have been brainwashed into disregarding the truth and forsaking righteousness and Christianity all in the name of their false charlatan idol: The cult mentality is extremely difficult to dislodge without intervention:
  
  I'm just curious to see what Mr. Trump does with his fans subsequent to his imprisonment: I doubt it will be pretty:
  reply report
  59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake! So much for rightwing armchair psychiatrists who exude desperation in every comment.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  So I guess this is the first time someone has pointed out to you that your ideological fellow-travelers are mentally deficient or mentally ill.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Your posts are quite literally examples of the way one should present oneself in order to get approved for Social Security Disability due to mental disability.
  
  There are people in my circle of acquaintances who know something about the workings of the approval process. If they know someone who would like to get on SS Disability, they sometimes explain the written responses the applicant should provide to demonstrate that their mental capacities are really, REALLY sub-optimal, to the point where they are likely incapable of holding a job and otherwise providing for themselves or caring for themselves.
  
  You seem to have nailed it.
  reply report
2. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Just the idea of Spanky thinking he can pardon himself for any crime should tell his voters he wants to be like his hero Putie! He thinks he's above the law just like a 3rd world dictator. Rudy said he could shoot Comey and get away with it. And Spanky's fan love this stuff.......unbelievable.
  reply report
81
Sharlee01posted 5 years ago
Jake, could you please explain why you feel our president will be jailed. Does not a person have to break a law be found guilty, and sentenced before one ends up in jail? I ask again. What crime has the president been charged with? Please don't bother listing Bimbo civil lawsuits. This form of a misdemeanor does not result in jail time.
reply report
1. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I never said Spanky Trump was going to jail, that conjures fluffy Mayberry images of Deputy Barney Fife picking up Otis for drunk walking and tossing him behind bars to sleep it off for the night with the cell key within easy reach:
  
  If we still have laws in this country, Spanky Trump will soon be headed straight to prison, a musty damp federal penitentiary where MS-13 hangs out, if he's lucky:
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMt8qCl5fPk
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake I asked for a specific crime? Jake is very apparent he has been charged with zero? Conversation over. You have nothing to offer that makes any sense.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Jake is rather obviously posting from a group home or some other similar institution. I suspect his presence here (and the fact that his hub passed QAP) has something to do with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
I've started an article called 'Can We Call Trumpism a Cult Yet?' Funny you should mention that.
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Some are rather cultish the way they band together with the same fake Fox News Talking Points, Val!
  reply report
  81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, some have banded together posting actual facts, giving proper resources to back given facts. Some have also banded together and continuously deflected off subject in light of not being able to answer or defend their vague views with any form of facts. Very simple to prove, just review comments. Very rare is a question answered, and frequently some divert by making glib uneducated insults.
  
  This kind of nonsense comments only stands to make one look foolish and ill-educated in a given subject. Randy, do you know how many times you resort to the "Fox News insult"? I can only speak for myself, but I rarely watch Fox news. It is very clear many that complain about president Trump do not have the facts about what he has accomplished. Unwilling to even care about the truth. This to me shows little common sense, as well as a lack of intellectual depth. Willing to believe the worse without actually researching a given subject. Willing to condemn without question.
  
  Cultist? That's for the weak mined that can be led by rhetoric, that can be easily controlled due to lack of intellectual depth. That will not question and defend without hesitation. Please read this thread, from start to end. It reads poorly for not "Trump supporters" but the people that deflect, call names and have no realization of truth.
  reply report
2. 66
  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Actually Valeant, it's no longer a question, you might think about changing the title to something like 'Trumpism, The Cult" or "The Cult of Trumpism" or "How Will The Cult of Trumpism End?" or "Spanky's Merry Band of Dysfunctionally Loyal Trumpeters": or "Blindly Trumpeting the Cult of Spanky":
  
  Just some off the cuff ideas:
  reply report
3. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Valeant, Yes, some have banded together posting actual facts, giving proper resources to back given facts. Some have also banded together and continuously deflected off subject in light of not being able to answer or defend their vague views with any form of facts. Very simple to prove, just review comments. Very rare is a question answered, and frequently some divert by making glib uneducated insults.
  
  This kind of nonsense comments only stands to make one look foolish and ill-educated in a given subject. Randy, do you know how many times you resort to the "Fox News insult"? I can only speak for myself, but I rarely watch Fox news. It is very clear many that complain about president Trump do not have the facts about what he has accomplished. Unwilling to even care about the truth. This to me shows little common sense, as well as a lack of intellectual depth. Willing to believe the worse without actually researching a given subject. Willing to condemn without question.
  
  Cultist? That's for the weak mined that can be led by rhetoric, that can be easily controlled due to lack of intellectual depth. That will not question and defend without hesitation. Please read this thread, from start to end. It reads poorly for not "Trump supporters" but the people that deflect, call names and have no realization of truth.
  reply report
  92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I'd say the liberal cohort here has added almost nothing to this discussion but name-calling, insult, innuendo, and fantasy. They've also demonstrated that they cannot or will not think and reason, and lack personal and intellectual integrity.
  
  Most of us are fortunate, in that we have seldom or never encountered anyone thus afflicted--other than in some sort of professional capacity.
  reply report
58
Johnny James Aposted 5 years ago
It is human nature for certain people to care who sleeps with who, as it is human nature for many to gossip. Trump is not even remotely the first leader of a country to have his dalliances looked into and he won’t be the last. Heck, it is human nature for a lot of people to want to know a lot about famous people in general. Did I need to know Ronal Reagan liked jelly beans? No, however, in the 80s that was stated over and over again. I am sure someone out there was glad to know that. Heck, President Bush Sr. hated broccoli so much that he banned it on Air Force One which made headlines. This was later incorporated into a great episode on West Wing when President Bartlett (played by Martin Sheen) was known for hating green beans and so one of his staff blabs he hates it which green beans. This caused an uproar. Why? Because in an election year, you never say anything to piss off green bean farmers or farmers in general. Allison Janney, who played CJ Cregg, had a great response to the incident. When Charlie Young, the president’s assistant played by Dule Hill, asked are people really that stupid that they would care if the president disliked green beans, she said “Everyone is stupid in an election year.” The fact is there are way too many individuals of varying political beliefs, faiths, races, ethnicities, religions, etc., who will grasp on to any reason to support or tear down someone. So, do people care if President Trump slept with a porn star? ABSOLUTELY. Do people care if Bill Clinton slept with Monica Lewinsky, whether he lied under oath or not? ABSOLUTELY. Do people care if Kennedy slept with Marilyn Monroe? ABSOLUTELY, regardless of any other implications supposed relationship may have had. Look back to 1984 and the Democratic Primary. The Dems knew going up against Reagan would be tough, however, they had a man by the name of Gary Hart who they thought would be a great Presidential or Vice-Presidential Nominee. An affair cost him a shot at the presidency, and if he somehow had won it…I am sure it would have been brought up again and again. John Edwards was the DNC’s internal darling in 2008. The thought was he would be the lynch pin to a 24-year Dem reign, as the DNC higher up liked him much more than Hillary or Barack. However, the thought was they would push for Hillary and have a Hillary-Edwards ticket (as they knew they needed a white man on the ticket, and Edwards was a good looking, charismatic, rich, educated man). This would be followed by a Edwards-Obama ticket then an Obama-?? Ticket. Then everything fell apart. Hillary opening defied the DNC when the DNC asked that all Dems remove their names from two states who purposely moved up their primary dates to get in on the publicity of a woman, minority and white man all being good candidates. Obama and Edwards followed the rules, Hillary did not and won those states. Now that had a problem if Hillary did not win the non-Super delegate votes by more than those two states people would scream she took advantage of the situation. Then the Edwards affair came out. Ironically, Hillary did not learn from 2008 about taking advantage of the votes when she got the Superdelegates to pledge early which went against the Hunt Commission’s purposes of creating Super Delegates. This cost her the election as many Bernie supporters did not support her. That being said, if Americans cared less about affairs then the Dems could have gone to plan B of a Obama-Edwards then an Edward-?? 16-year reign. So, affairs matter to the public. Always have, and always will. This is nothing new, or some vendetta against Trump. It is the media whipping something into a frenzy as it sells.
reply report
1. 81
  Sharlee01posted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Can't argue with one word of your comment. Enjoyed your view.
  reply report
85
Valeantposted 5 years ago
reply report
1. 59
  Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Yep, Spanky fans feel they are owed credibility. Just like their idol.....
  reply report
2. 92
  blueheronposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  You should explain your reasons for believing the MSM is credible. If you can.
  reply report
  0
  promisemposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  I can:
  
  1. MSM is just a mishmash of different types of media that follow completely different rules. The National Enquirer is "mainstream" and "media". It hardly is the same thing as Fox News.
  
  2. Professional journalists such as the ones that work at Washington Post uses multiple sources for an article that goes through multiple layers of fact checking.
  
  3. As a result, real journalists have a much higher degree of accuracy than an entertainment rag like National Enquirer, which gets sued on a regular basis. The Washington Post rarely gets sued and almost never loses because it proves its accuracy in court.
  
  4. Accuracy = credibility.
  
  5. Extremists get mad when journalists report something they don't want to hear. Fox News of course tells its viewers that all "MSM" lies except for Fox News. So real journalists have no "credibility" with extremists.
  reply report
  94
  Dean Traylorposted 5 years agoin reply to this
  Very, very true (sorry for borrowing Trump vernaculars on that one).
  reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 2 3 4 56 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Who Cares About Trump's Affair with a Porn Star?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

Who Cares About Trump's Affair with a Porn Star?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies