Current Events > Trump: Oh, I get it! I am a very good developer, happily living my life, when I

(+) Yeah! (+)

Nixon Sees 'Witch-Hunt,' Insiders Say
by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein
---

There is a problem with him running his business while also president.
---

Going by the rule of Donnie... he heavily looked into building in Russia and tried to bribe as many people as he possibly could by guaranteeing promises to whoever he talked to. Invested a shit ton of money.
---

Heineken14 posted...

Going by the rule of Donnie... he heavily looked into building in Russia and tried to bribe as many people as he possibly could by guaranteeing promises to whoever he talked to. Invested a shit ton of money.

we're about to find out how he allocated his money (which he claimed publicly just now he spent none of it on Russia) once Mueller reveals what he found at the tax lawyer raid.
---

https://twitter.com/The_Trump_Train/status/1067687857400229888?s=09
---

I can't get over "very legal & very cool"

Caution999 posted...

I mean, Trump really might've been the only Presidential candidate in recent memory to also be conducting business at the same time.

It's certainly a unique situation. Which, perhaps, we need to make a rule/law for. That candidates cannot do this moving forward.

You mean like the Emoluments clause which has been in the Constitution of the United States of America snice at least 1789 ?

Also President Jimmy Carter sold his Peanut Farm. They appointed special councils and everything to watch Carter like a hawk to make sure he was playing by the rules.
---

Dampproof posted...

Caution999 posted...

I mean, Trump really might've been the only Presidential candidate in recent memory to also be conducting business at the same time.

It's certainly a unique situation. Which, perhaps, we need to make a rule/law for. That candidates cannot do this moving forward.

You mean like the Emoluments clause which has been in the Constitution of the United States of America snice at least 1789 ?

Other than conducting business, how about staying at HIS OWN HOTELS on our dime? And how about charging Secret Service to rent golf carts to protect HIM? Its ridiculous.
---

Lightly looked at doing a building somewhere in Russia

So he just admitted to violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
---

LooksLikeDarko posted...

I can't get over "very legal & very cool"

Trump very shook, much like a big and (allegedly) tough guy shouting "I'm very cool and very not scared!" as he (tremulously) enters a haunted house.
---

jborgan posted...

Lightly looked at doing a building somewhere in Russia

So he just admitted to violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Lightly legal
---

Yeah I'm thinking he may be impeached afterall, despite our valueless federal government.
---

Dampproof posted...

Caution999 posted...

I mean, Trump really might've been the only Presidential candidate in recent memory to also be conducting business at the same time.

It's certainly a unique situation. Which, perhaps, we need to make a rule/law for. That candidates cannot do this moving forward.

You mean like the Emoluments clause which has been in the Constitution of the United States of America snice at least 1789 ?

Also President Jimmy Carter sold his Peanut Farm. They appointed special councils and everything to watch Carter like a hawk to make sure he was playing by the rules.

Exactly. Caution, all the things you're claiming about that there is now law or precedence set is just factually untrue. The thing's you're acting like are unique to Trump simply isn't true and it's more and more likely he violated the law.
---

Why are people replying to caution after he set up a racist little chatroom for people to discuss genocide and alex jones

doesn't make sense tbh
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

Yeah I'm thinking he may be impeached afterall, despite our valueless federal government.

He's not going to. That still relies on the GOP not being utter shit sacks.
---

Heineken14 posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

Yeah I'm thinking he may be impeached afterall, despite our valueless federal government.

He's not going to. That still relies on the GOP not being utter shit sacks.

Well on one hand there's law and order, on the other there's anarchy. Most GOP members aren't intelligent enough to realize this but one or two are.
---

Heineken14 posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

Yeah I'm thinking he may be impeached afterall, despite our valueless federal government.

He's not going to. That still relies on the GOP not being utter shit sacks.

Oh, he can be impeached. All we need is a majority in the house for that. But we need 2/3 of the Senate to remove him from office. That's probably not happening.
---

Bill Clinton could not be removed with republican majority I don't know why anyone is expecting the current shitstains to be more Honorable than that.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Bill Clinton could not be removed with republican majority I don't know why anyone is expecting the current shitstains to be more Honorable than that.

The only hope we have is that they realize this is a bit more weighty than blow job perjury.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Dampproof posted...

Caution999 posted...

I mean, Trump really might've been the only Presidential candidate in recent memory to also be conducting business at the same time.

It's certainly a unique situation. Which, perhaps, we need to make a rule/law for. That candidates cannot do this moving forward.

You mean like the Emoluments clause which has been in the Constitution of the United States of America snice at least 1789 ?

Also President Jimmy Carter sold his Peanut Farm. They appointed special councils and everything to watch Carter like a hawk to make sure he was playing by the rules.

Exactly. Caution, all the things you're claiming about that there is now law or precedence set is just factually untrue. The thing's you're acting like are unique to Trump simply isn't true and it's more and more likely he violated the law.

Fair enough. I stand corrected..Er rather better informed lol.

But...he didnt go thru with it though. Its gonna be hard to make this stick imo
---

Caution999 posted...

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Dampproof posted...

Caution999 posted...

I mean, Trump really might've been the only Presidential candidate in recent memory to also be conducting business at the same time.

It's certainly a unique situation. Which, perhaps, we need to make a rule/law for. That candidates cannot do this moving forward.

You mean like the Emoluments clause which has been in the Constitution of the United States of America snice at least 1789 ?

Also President Jimmy Carter sold his Peanut Farm. They appointed special councils and everything to watch Carter like a hawk to make sure he was playing by the rules.

Exactly. Caution, all the things you're claiming about that there is now law or precedence set is just factually untrue. The thing's you're acting like are unique to Trump simply isn't true and it's more and more likely he violated the law.

Fair enough. I stand corrected..Er rather better informed lol.

But...he didnt go thru with it though. Its gonna be hard to make this stick imo

Trying and failing to commit a crime is still a crime. You don't get let off the hook just because your illegal enterprise didn't pan out the way you'd hoped.
---

Caution999 posted...

With all due respect, I don't wanna start a shouting match. I'm trying really hard to be a nicer person. I respect you, and I respect the fact that anyone could be right in the end.

People would respect you more if you didn't just spout uninformed opinions on what was going on. Even after this post you've been corrected on two or three more things in this topic that just the smallest amount of research would have told were wrong.
---

See, thats where I disagree. I consider message boards like an E-bar. Bar room conversations dont generally have one guy get up and start thumbing thru an
Encyclopedia.

Edit: not that I expect people to do research for me, because I can do my own.

Like if you wanna prove me wrong with facts, as I was in this topic, awesome. I accepted it.

I like to talk I guess. I dont think it should be mandatory for every time anyone gets on here that they should be 100% correct all the time. Theres a certain enjoyment I get from communicating with you guys.
---

Very cool!
---

Caution999 posted...

But...he didnt go thru with it though. Its gonna be hard to make this stick imo

Cohen pled guilty. It's already stuck to a degree.
---

Caution999 posted...

I dont think it should be mandatory for every time anyone gets on here that they should be 100% correct all the time.

You know that there's numbers between 100 and 0, right?
---

The investigation is going to yield an everything big mac with a mcchicken patty in place of the middle bun
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The investigation is going to yield an everything big mac with a mcchicken patty in place of the middle bun

Very cool

Much legal

Wow
---

Caution999 posted...

See, thats where I disagree. I consider message boards like an E-bar. Bar room conversations dont generally have one guy get up and start thumbing thru an
Encyclopedia.

Edit: not that I expect people to do research for me, because I can do my own.

Like if you wanna prove me wrong with facts, as I was in this topic, awesome. I accepted it.

I like to talk I guess. I dont think it should be mandatory for every time anyone gets on here that they should be 100% correct all the time. Theres a certain enjoyment I get from communicating with you guys.

Idk, do you think people like the person at the bar who's spouting off crap he doesn't know about to people who keep correcting him? This isn't about your knowledge. I think it's fine to be wrong on the internet. It's about how you're not actually interested in having a conversation OR you're so down the rabbit hole on defending Trump that you will just take any position that supports him. Let's just look at you in this topic:

"Here's my biased take: Trump can do whatever he wants to do." "Actually he can't."

"Well damn, maybe they should make a law against it then." "There is a law against it."

"Well damn, I guess Cohen is probably lying then." "No evidence of that."

"Well damn, Trump is in a pretty unique situation though with being in business and stuff." "No, they specifically made laws anticipating this."

"Well damn, but he can't get charged because it didn't work." "Well actually, you can still get charged for unsuccessful crimes."

Like tell me this looks like an honest conversation to you. Despite "learning" stuff, did you change your opinion at all to adopt that new information?
---

Lol very legal and very cool
---

Caution999 posted...

See, thats where I disagree. I consider message boards like an E-bar. Bar room conversations dont generally have one guy get up and start thumbing thru an
Encyclopedia.

Edit: not that I expect people to do research for me, because I can do my own.

Like if you wanna prove me wrong with facts, as I was in this topic, awesome. I accepted it.

I like to talk I guess. I dont think it should be mandatory for every time anyone gets on here that they should be 100% correct all the time. Theres a certain enjoyment I get from communicating with you guys.

I don't really think the problem is that people care if you're right or wrong, it's that even when you acknowledge and accept someone else's arguments regarding Trump or one of his cronies, you begin making excuses and defending it and/or treating it as acceptable.

I mean if you want to do that, it's your prerogative, but saying that what he did "wasn't wrong" is not constructive discussion. If you want to say what he did was necessary or could be ignored because of some other positive effect, that's a different stance to take, but in my experience, and not specifically you, but just right wing posters in general, is that the "net positive" typically amounts to some variation of "owning the libs" or "anti-pc culture" or some various dressed up racist/sexist agenda.

If you think this backdoor deal with Russia had some value beyond the obvious that makes treason worthwhile, I'd love to hear it. I mean you can justify Iran-Contra if you're that type of person who thinks communism is the worst threat to modern society, but I can't apprehend why anyone would set up a deal like this with Putin other than their own greed and corruption.
---

Even I have to admit it's over for Trump now. Impeachment, removal, imprisonment. The whole nine yards. He's finished. Very demoralizing.
---

Gotta wonder which Republicans in congress are complicit in this as well. That "investigation" they did was obviously a joke.
---

CableZL posted...

Gotta wonder which Republicans in congress are complicit in this as well. That "investigation" they did was obviously a joke.

Good thing this was released after the midterms so we will get objective facts on that
---

CableZL posted...

Gotta wonder which Republicans in congress are complicit in this as well. That "investigation" they did was obviously a joke.

Well Rohrabacher is (was? since he doesn't matter anymore?) for sure.

Nunes has to be, the guy could not have acted any more guilty.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Lmao, I love how slowly these posts are shifting.

Let's all chant the narcissist's prayer:

A Narcissist's Prayer

That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did...
You deserved it.

Did you make that up Pinky? That's pretty damn good lol.
---

Funbazooka posted...

Even I have to admit it's over for Trump now. Impeachment, removal, imprisonment. The whole nine yards. He's finished. Very demoralizing.

Very cool.
---

Find 20 Republican senators willing to step out on that limb to remove even an obviously guilty Trump from office.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Serious Cat posted...

Caution999 posted...

I mean, Trump really might've been the only Presidential candidate in recent memory to also be conducting business at the same time.

It's certainly a unique situation. Which, perhaps, we need to make a rule for. That candidates cannot do this moving forward.

Again, it's not illegal to conduct business. What is illegal, running for president or not, is for an American company doing business abroad to bribe foreign government officials. Cohen admitted to attempting this and admitted that he lied about it under oath. Whether or not Trump had knowledge of this might be debatable, but I emphasize that his attorney admitted it, and admitted that he attempted to cover it up.

Alright, I think I figured it out.

Cohen's plea deal with Mueller is basically amounting to throwing Donnie Jr. under the bus with the Russian deal and that's why it sounds like he's cracking.

God damn I'm a fucking prophet

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/it-seems-robert-mueller-has-the-evidence-needed-to-charge-donald-trump-jr-right-now/
---

hockeybub89 posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The investigation is going to yield an everything big mac with a mcchicken patty in place of the middle bun

Very cool

Much legal

Wow

@The_Doge
---

Lord_Shadow posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

The investigation is going to yield an everything big mac with a mcchicken patty in place of the middle bun

Very cool

Much legal

Wow

@The_Doge

Such investigation
Very bad hair
So wall
Make Cate pay
Wow
---

tweeting this was a very bad idea on his part.
---