Usa Thread

[buffalo_bill]

6 hours ago, cavanami said:

Bubi

Check the link as all the crimes are listed.

Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him.

[cavanami]

5 hours ago, buffalo_bill said:

Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him.

Bubi...wake up call...ALL PRESIDENTS have done this...do you understand ALL PRESIDENTS?

That said, it is NOT necessary the right thing to do but it is COMMONLY DONE.

[Steve]

Trump is reminiscent of Hitler in the bunker. Surrounding himself with people who will bend over and let him cuck them. That's it. No experience needed. The position specifically says the person should have, national security experience, intel or military experience. The only experience this guy Grennel has is having his head in Trump's lap This guy has ZERO experience. Its a vital position. This guy has zero idea about the intel that comes across. Trump has literally put the nation at risk. 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/20/politics/republican-reaction-richard-grenell-pick/index.html

 

[Flashermac]

[Flashermac]

8 hours ago, buffalo_bill said:

Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him.

"Don't forget that Bill Clinton pardoned his brother and a convicted Wall Street felon whose ex-wife contributed to Clinton's presidential library and Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign. In doing so, Clinton set a modern-day precedent for presidents who want to use the pardon power in ways that some may see as, well, unpardonable."

Buffalo News

 

[cavanami]

12 hours ago, buffalo_bill said:

Mr Cav , point was that Trump selects pardonable people after what they or related people might have done for him.

I'll make it easy for you Bubi...

[Pom Michael]

Pardons are an ugly part of our government.

But normally - most are at the end of their presidency - not all - but a majority wait until the end.

[Flashermac]

But then they can't vote for your reelection.

[Steve]

4 hours ago, cavanami said:

I'll make it easy for you Bubi...

The argument isn't the number, its whom and why. Lets not obfuscate who for amount. Obama pardoned hundreds who were in federal offense for stuff like pot. The elder Bush pardoned some characters involved in Iran Contra for Reagan. I was very upset about that at the time. Many were. Pardoning for money is bribery and impeachable. Trump has done that. To excuse things with 'someone else has done it too' and that someone else didn't on this level either. 

Call balls and strikes. That's it. Trying to excuse some thing because its somewhat relatable to a prior administration is wrong. Did Republicans call out Clinton 

PS: Clinton pardoned his brother several years AFTER he served his sentence and had been paroled. It was wrong but its vastly different than influencing sentencing and there has been nothing on the level and scope of Trump. Lots of apples and oranges comparisons. 

How does one claim he's draining the swamp on one hand and excusing swamp behavior by saying the swamp has been doing it? Hypocritical argument. I don't expect a legitimate answer. The question is rhetorical. 

[Steve]

I used to think Rand Paul and  Bernie Sanders) were the two who had the integrity to act according to their beliefs. Both polar opposites politically but acting on their honest view of the constitution with ethics. Paul's support for acquittal and other things that were clearly improper by Trump have made me see him for who he really is. Integrity applied in a narrow tunnel. Bernie Sanders, no matter what I think of his politics is at least honest in his beliefs and applies it honestly. You know what you are getting has been . The rest don't. Ron Paul wishy washy as well. I lost a lot of respect for him. Paul has been accused of having nationalist leanings and the election of Trump has exposed a lot of people.