Trump And Kavanaugh To Be Investigated By Democratic House: Answers Sought.

[Darth Omar]

I've said from 2016 that Dems would take the House but lose 2-3 seats in the Senate, no matter how strong anti-Trump sentiment was. Because they had over twice as many seats to protect in the Senate.

The opposite is true in 2020; GOP has 22 seats up, and Dems have 12. Huge advantage. Of course there is a tiny chance that the GOP could win, but extremely unlikely. It's really basic logistics.

I seem to recall you preaching Trump instigated gloom and doom about this time last year. Democrats came out ahead last Tuesday but the Blue Wave was mitigated.

Did you predict a marginal democrat victory in the midterms?

[Cancel 2020.1]

I seem to recall you preaching Trump instigated gloom and doom about this time last year. Democrats came out ahead last Tuesday but the Blue Wave was mitigated.

Did you predict a marginal democrat victory in the midterms?

I said that they'd take the House, and I don't really buy into your Fox-led spin that last Tuesday was "marginal." Once again, MANY more people in the country voted Dem than GOP.

And you "seem to recall"? Why don't YOU bump something. I said the Dems would take the House, and they did. You were the one who kept saying they weren't connecting w/ Americans and would lose.

[Darth Omar]

I said that they'd take the House, and I don't really buy into your Fox-led spin that last Tuesday was "marginal." Once again, MANY more people in the country voted Dem than GOP.

And you "seem to recall"? Why don't YOU bump something. I said the Dems would take the House, and they did. You were the one who kept saying they weren't connecting w/ Americans and would lose.

I don’t care enough about it lol.

You’re the one boasting about your political acumen. Go back a year. Impress the class.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Darth,

It gives every appearance of being a hoax lol. How’s that?

House democrats re-opening the Russian investigation will make at least the third attempt at finding collusion. If democrats are goofy enough to plumb that dry hole, again, I won’t stand in their way.

Why do you think it is a dry hole? We've never gotten to the bottom of it.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Thing1,

I've said from 2016 that Dems would take the House but lose 2-3 seats in the Senate, no matter how strong anti-Trump sentiment was. Because they had over twice as many seats to protect in the Senate.

The opposite is true in 2020; GOP has 22 seats up, and Dems have 12. Huge advantage. Of course there is a tiny chance that the GOP could win, but extremely unlikely. It's really basic logistics.

That's very reassuring for the left. But there is time for politics to evolve before then. Don't forget the presidential coat tails effect. Even if Trump is found guilty of crimes many of his followers will refuse to believe it. He's got his base to the point that they foolishly only believe what he says and they think the news is fake.

[Cancel 2020.1]

I don’t care enough about it lol.

You’re the one boasting about your political acumen. Go back a year. Impress the class.

Where did I boast? It's basic politics.

[PoliTalker]

I don’t care enough about it lol.

Blocking out the part where you where wrong?

So that's how to rationalize support for Republicans these days.

Got it.

[Darth Omar]

Hello Darth,



Why do you think it is a dry hole? We've never gotten to the bottom of it.

I can give reasons but you’ll wave them off lol.

Why are you so hopeful about it when nothing has turned up after over two years of looking for collusion? And they’ve been looking very, very, hard for it.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Darth,

I can give reasons but you’ll wave them off lol.

Why are you so hopeful about it when nothing has turned up after over two years of looking for collusion? And they’ve been looking very, very, hard for it.

I am hopeful that the USA can overcome setbacks like Trump. Collusion has already been shown. Much has been turned up. The majority of the nation disapproves of Trump. We want answers. We are going to have them. You can ignore them, make up things to make you feel better if you like. That's your freedom.

America voted for answers.

The party of excuses is fading away.

[Darth Omar]

Hello Darth,



I am hopeful that the USA can overcome setbacks like Trump. Collusion has already been shown. Much has been turned up. The majority of the nation disapproves of Trump. We want answers. We are going to have them. You can ignore them, make up things to make you feel better if you like. That's your freedom.

America voted for answers.

The party of excuses is fading away.

To whatever extent you think Trump is guilty of colluding there is no statute that covers collusion.

As Alan Dershowitz quipped, ‘collusion may be a sin but it’s not a crime’. For months and months as some democrats and the media droned-on mindlessly about Russian collusion, myself and others were pointing out the obvious fact colluding with Russians or any foreign government is not a crime according to statutory law.

Assuming there was even any evidence that Trump is guilty of the ‘non-crime’ of collusion.

If there’s money involved, that would be a different matter. And guess what. The DNC/Hillary consortium *actually colluded* with Russians via at least two intermediaries in putting together the worthless Dossier. Which they used as an instrument to illegally spy on Carter Page.

And for the second or third time today I get to type the words ‘how do you even make this stuff up?’

So yeah, if Democrats want to go after collusion, again, I say have at it.

Maybe it will cause Trump’s AG to appoint another desperately needed SP.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Darth,

To whatever extent you think Trump is guilty of colluding there is no statute that covers collusion.

As Alan Dershowitz quipped, ‘collusion may be a sin but it’s not a crime’. For months and months as some democrats and the media droned-on mindlessly about Russian collusion, myself and others were pointing out the obvious fact colluding with Russians or any foreign government is not a crime according to statutory law.

Assuming there was even any evidence that Trump is guilty of the ‘non-crime’ of collusion.

If there’s money involved, that would be a different matter. And guess what. The DNC/Hillary consortium *actually colluded* with Russians via at least two intermediaries in putting together the worthless Dossier. Which they used as an instrument to illegally spy on Carter Page.

And for the second or third time today I get to type the words ‘how do you even make this stuff up?’

So yeah, if Democrats want to go after collusion, again, I say have at it.

Maybe it will cause Trump’s AG to appoint another desperately needed SP.

A long way around the tree trunk of handing out free passes.

Most of the nation is not fooled.

First 'there is no collusion,' then 'even if there was collusion it's not a crime.'

I am just *so* glad I am not trying to argue your position.

I couldn't do it and be honest with myself.

I am not concerned that collusion will be the downfall.

I think it will be obstruction, campaign finance, emoluments or taxes.

[Darth Omar]

Hello Darth,



A long way around the tree trunk of handing out free passes.

Most of the nation is not fooled.

First 'there is no collusion,' then 'even if there was collusion it's not a crime.'

I am just *so* glad I am not trying to argue your position.

I couldn't do it and be honest with myself.

I am not concerned that collusion will be the downfall.

I think it will be obstruction, campaign finance, emoluments or taxes.

So, you condone the perverse little Hat Trick.

The myth of collusion was just a pretext to get an SP appointment to go on a crime search. That’s no big secret to anyone paying attention.

[Fentoine Lum]

Trump fired the first shot by replacing Sessions with his loyalist Whitaker. Whitaker has already discussed a slow-kill approach to the Mueller investigation by cutting the funding. This is Trump's back door way of shutting down the Muller investigation.

He has dared Democrats to respond.

Let the investigations begin!


WashPo



Standard anti-troll thread thief disclaimer:

Does anyone really need to investigate known demonstrable pathological liars?

[PoliTalker]

So, you condone the perverse little Hat Trick.

The myth of collusion was just a pretext to get an SP appointment to go on a crime search. That’s no big secret to anyone paying attention.

You seem to be obsessed with the word 'collusion.'

Trump asked for it when he fired Comey.

I hope Trump gets everything he deserves.

[Nordberg]

To whatever extent you think Trump is guilty of colluding there is no statute that covers collusion.

As Alan Dershowitz quipped, ‘collusion may be a sin but it’s not a crime’. For months and months as some democrats and the media droned-on mindlessly about Russian collusion, myself and others were pointing out the obvious fact colluding with Russians or any foreign government is not a crime according to statutory law.

Assuming there was even any evidence that Trump is guilty of the ‘non-crime’ of collusion.

If there’s money involved, that would be a different matter. And guess what. The DNC/Hillary consortium *actually colluded* with Russians via at least two intermediaries in putting together the worthless Dossier. Which they used as an instrument to illegally spy on Carter Page.

And for the second or third time today I get to type the words ‘how do you even make this stuff up?’

So yeah, if Democrats want to go after collusion, again, I say have at it.

Maybe it will cause Trump’s AG to appoint another desperately needed SP.

You just explained why the right is fixated on collusion. It is tough to prove, However, campaign finance violations are clear and bright,. Can't wait for Daffy's taxes to prove money laundering.