The Trump Presidency

[thethe]

The cartel is not sneaking across the border, and no, illegal immigrants don't deserve to be shot. I'm okay with shooting gang members and drug runners, but you have to know who they are. Your ridiculously prejudiced remark implied you are okay with killing illegal immigrants because a small percentage of them are drug runners. American doctors and drug companies do a lot of damage. You should be okay with shooting them down as well. A percentage of them are bad.

Thats actually not what i said at all

[cajunrevenge]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalex.../#6c8bf72e33d9



Forbes reposts 1990 investigation into Trumps wealth.....

[MrShwag]

Thats actually not what i said at all

They can't help themselves. It's programming.

[goldfly]

[MrShwag]

Oh ****, that's a tax law violation!? Which one?

[MrShwag]

Oh ****, that's a tax law violation!? Which one?

So his reported losses were fraud and he's actually a good businessman that earned money. Or lawl-omg he's a bad business man and lossed money and the losses are not fraudulent.

Which one is it? Of course it's both with you people.

He wrote about his losses in Art of the Comeback. They are well documented.

But muh russia.. muh obstruction.. muh tax fraud.

Nice echo chamber you're trapped in, bro.

[nsacpi]

For those who have interest in understanding how Trump was able to survive his losses here is a dated and somewhat speculative but still informative article.

http://money.com/money/4553067/trump...ess-practices/

It goes without saying there is a compelling public interest in having Trump's taxes released from several perspectives. One is simple due diligence that voters need to undertake with respect to people running for high office. Another is the need to understand what happened and how the IRS interpreted the law in his particular case. Transparency is more than a slogan in this particular instance.

[Carp]

Corrupt intent is pretty well established in the attempts to shut down the investigation, among other things. FWIW, you should probably ask a lawyer about whether or not an individual has to have committed an underlying crime in order to be liable for an obstruction charge. It’s, like, 101-level stuff.

Personally, I suspect that Trump was concerned that the investigation would uncover crimes committed by the campaign, by his business, or by him personally, perhaps wholly unrelated to Russian interference in the election. I suspect that he was right to be concerned, and it’s pretty strongly hinted in Volume II of the report that the prosecutors believed this, too.

I tried explaining something similar to him earlier. He just refuses to accept it and keeps regurgitating the same rhetoric.

[Carp]

So the cartels dont deserve to be shot?

As usual, you completely miss the point.

[nsacpi]

Judge is fast-tracking Trump's attempt to quash the subpoena of his financial records.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/09/polit...ena/index.html

Seems kind of unfair to me that an immigrant from a ****hole country gets to be the judge in such an important case. A Gujarati no less.

[Acuña’s Bat Flip]

So the cartels dont deserve to be shot?

"Only if they are not Caucasian and have any hint of dark skin." - Trump

[thethe]

As usual, you completely miss the point.

No, its others that missed what i was clearly saying. But of course fake outrage in the rage these days.

[Carp]

No, its others that missed what i was clearly saying. But of course fake outrage in the rage these days.

No. The point is, when someone says something that's incredibly racist and hateful like that, the correct response is complete and absolute comdemnation of those remarks.

The correct response is most certainly NOT "Theres definitely a small subset of people crossing the border that should be shot."

That statement, especially by itself, makes it seem like you are ok with the original comment or, at the very least, indifferent of it.

[thethe]

No. The point is, when someone says something that's incredibly racist and hateful like that, the correct response is complete and absolute comdemnation of those remarks.

The correct response is most certainly NOT "Theres definitely a small subset of people crossing the border that should be shot."

That statement, especially by itself, makes it seem like you are ok with the original comment or, at the very least, indifferent of it.

No, it most certainly doesnt despite how many times you try to make the claim. What you are essentially pushing is a thought crime which is in line with all the racist allegations that the left throws out because they 'know' what youre really saying.

[57Brave]

no one should be randomly shot -- no matter.


Finding justification is "deplorable"
whatever the justification

[thethe]

no one should be randomly shot -- no matter.


Finding justification is "deplorable"
whatever the justification

Rapists should be shot

Murderers should be shot

Drug smugglers that are killing tens of thousands of americans should be shot

So sure...go with your approach. Whatever it takes to get votes.

[Acuña’s Bat Flip]

So his reported losses were fraud and he's actually a good businessman that earned money. Or lawl-omg he's a bad business man and lossed money and the losses are not fraudulent.

Which one is it? Of course it's both with you people.

He wrote about his losses in Art of the Comeback. They are well documented.

But muh russia.. muh obstruction.. muh tax fraud.

Nice echo chamber you're trapped in, bro.

Russia has nothing to do with it, it’s the media’s hate for Hillary! It’s you people that live in the echo chamber!

[Carp]

No, it most certainly doesnt despite how many times you try to make the claim. What you are essentially pushing is a thought crime which is in line with all the racist allegations that the left throws out because they 'know' what youre really saying.

A racist said something completely reprehensible and your only response was to somewhat agree with him and say nothing to condemn the racist statement. There is nothing to push.

[thethe]

A racist said something completely reprehensible and your only response was to somewhat agree with him and say nothing to condemn the racist statement. There is nothing to push.

Unfortunate that in your world there is a 'correct' and therefore only acceptable response to anything.

Youve been accused of wrongthink

[57Brave]

The Boston Globe
‏Verified account @BostonGlobe


The White House misspelled the Red Sox as "Red Socks"

on its website ahead of today's visit. http://bos.gl/jbLNQ9z



Lawrence O'Donnell
‏Verified account @Lawrence
7h7 hours ago

Lawrence O'Donnell Retweeted The Boston Globe

Spelling like this is the way they used to catch Soviet spies.