ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
A million a year, or thereabouts. :idunno:
But don't worry, it's not a genocide.
I guess they don't count
Mueller turns up the heat on impeachment
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
I guess they don't count
drbrumley
Well-known member
Im guessing she wants a civil war
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
That’s what ought to happen unless the House blinks.
drbrumley
Well-known member
:nono:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Did we have a civil war after Clinton? You shouldn’t need to guess to answer that.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Are you gonna stop repeating yourself any time soon?
drbrumley
Well-known member
Clinton wasn't almost universally hated
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
I'm guessing she still hasn't gotten over Hillary losing
drbrumley
Well-known member
That's the meat of it right there..
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Your criteria for Civil War seems to be impeachment. So now we recall that no impeachment has caused civil war. Having said that, Civil War will come from the right (not the left), if their political messiah is deposed.
drbrumley
Well-known member
My criteria for a civil war is the soft coup your side is attempting...because the left are nothing more than sore losers
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
That’s the story you like to tell yourself I know. But that’s not really the truth is it? “Your“ side is willfully blind to the damage Trump and his administration are doing to our constitutional rights that “your” side claims to love and defend. The truth will out in the end, and I know now that rights mean nothing to “your” side if it means that someone else’s rights that don’t mirror “your” side’s might be equally defended.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
What constitutional rights has trump damaged?
drbrumley
Well-known member
1. I dont have a side..
2. What rights has trump taken away from you? Be specific...
drbrumley
Well-known member
Dems Are Planning to Steal the 2020 Election
By William L. Gensert
American Thinker
June 26, 2019
Democrats have an insurance policy for the 2020 Presidential election, and it has nothing to do with the eventual Democratic Party nominee. The original policy was initiated by Obama, Comey, Brennan, McCabe, Hillary, and their ilk, bragged about by Strzok to his paramour, and paid for by the Democrat/media cabal. The mephitic Mueller tried to cash it in, but the hero Marine got slapped down by Barr.
It’s a plan to “win” the election by any means necessary, even by cheating if necessary. Of its components, the “failsafe,” is most intriguing, if for no other reason than it is so devious, underhanded, clever, and inventive, that it’s surprising it comes from the same left which gave us the ridiculously ludicrous Steele dossier and Smollett hoax.
By William L. Gensert
American Thinker
June 26, 2019
Democrats have an insurance policy for the 2020 Presidential election, and it has nothing to do with the eventual Democratic Party nominee. The original policy was initiated by Obama, Comey, Brennan, McCabe, Hillary, and their ilk, bragged about by Strzok to his paramour, and paid for by the Democrat/media cabal. The mephitic Mueller tried to cash it in, but the hero Marine got slapped down by Barr.
It’s a plan to “win” the election by any means necessary, even by cheating if necessary. Of its components, the “failsafe,” is most intriguing, if for no other reason than it is so devious, underhanded, clever, and inventive, that it’s surprising it comes from the same left which gave us the ridiculously ludicrous Steele dossier and Smollett hoax.
drbrumley
Well-known member
October Surprise.
Notice how quickly E. Jean Carroll disappeared from the headlines? Or, how the same media, which has a conniption fit when Trump asks for an extra scoop of ice cream, scarcely publicized her rape accusation, and then let the matter drop with nary a peep? Perhaps a sealed indictment of Donald Trump (New York has no statute of limitations for first-degree rape) is being processed as we speak, with the purpose of it being leaked just in time for the election.
Or a sealed indictment of Trump for campaign finance violations with respect to the Stormy Daniel payments will be leaked by the Office of the U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York — remember, Cohen and others are still “cooperating.” And it’s no secret they’ve been investigating Trump.
In any case, expect a leak of a “sealed indictment” for something; the something is immaterial. They’ve been shown the man; they’ll find the crime. It’s common knowledge a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, right? Well, there’s no bigger ham than Trump — all they need do is make the sandwich.
Mueller made a big deal about not being able to prosecute a sitting president, so much so, one is reminded of a Stephanopoulos’ setup question. Get it out there so when it comes up again and they run with it, it seems fair because, heck, they gave him the benefit of the consideration and if not for the unfortunate leak, the indictment would have remained sealed and secret until Trump was no longer president. In the fashion of Obama with every scandal, “no one is madder” than they about the leaks, and darn it, they’re putting their best team of men on it…
Notice how quickly E. Jean Carroll disappeared from the headlines? Or, how the same media, which has a conniption fit when Trump asks for an extra scoop of ice cream, scarcely publicized her rape accusation, and then let the matter drop with nary a peep? Perhaps a sealed indictment of Donald Trump (New York has no statute of limitations for first-degree rape) is being processed as we speak, with the purpose of it being leaked just in time for the election.
Or a sealed indictment of Trump for campaign finance violations with respect to the Stormy Daniel payments will be leaked by the Office of the U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York — remember, Cohen and others are still “cooperating.” And it’s no secret they’ve been investigating Trump.
In any case, expect a leak of a “sealed indictment” for something; the something is immaterial. They’ve been shown the man; they’ll find the crime. It’s common knowledge a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, right? Well, there’s no bigger ham than Trump — all they need do is make the sandwich.
Mueller made a big deal about not being able to prosecute a sitting president, so much so, one is reminded of a Stephanopoulos’ setup question. Get it out there so when it comes up again and they run with it, it seems fair because, heck, they gave him the benefit of the consideration and if not for the unfortunate leak, the indictment