They thought Trump was crazy in the 3rd debate..
-
In the 3rd and final debate, the moderator Chris Wallace asked Donald Trump if he would accept the results of the election if he lost. His reply was expected to be "Yes", but he said "maybe". This shocked the moderator and Hillary. Hillary then lectured that no matter what, whoever wins the election is to be accepted and respected, even if you don't agree with them or don't like them etc. Pretty much everybody agreed that once the election was over, the winner would be recognized, and political differences over the legitimacy of the elections would be over and done with.
That was when Hillary was expected to win.
Since then, Trump has been attacked daily by the democrats and most of the media. They have been calling for his impeachment since the moment he won the election. It has gotten so absurd that Trump can't fart without someone demanding an independent council to investigate it.
So much for accepting the results of the election.
In regards to Obama, and specifically Hillary. Every time they have spoken since the election, they call for never ending resistance - which is exactly what they were so adamantly opposed to.
-
Face it, we thought 45 was crazy LONG before the 3rd debate. As it is, he just keeps proving (over and over and over) that we were correct. His 'administration' is now rife with nepotism and even Republicans want his Russia ties investigated (excluding Nunes who appears to be a WH flunkie). Trump is being investigated, not for political reasons, but for reasons so fucking obvious that his own party wants them looked into. He is dragging the GOP into a, dare I say it, swamp.
-
So- you're saying that the calls to investigate him are because people refuse to accept the election results? I'm sorry but that's a non sequitur. Specially when even members of his party have begun to voice their own support for investigating his ties to Russia.
There's more than enough evidence to warrant investigating him without it just being politically motivated. If we followed your flawed line of reasoning- then no one would ever be able to legitimately investigate any of his suspicious activities and ties because he'd just hide behind the defense of it being politically motivated and a "refusal to accept election results". I'm sorry but no, it doesn't work like that.
Besides, a lot of the controversy also comes from his own actions- he promised to release his tax returns after the elections and yet he still refuses to be transparent about it. If he's really got nothing to hide, and all the other presidential candidates have shown their own tax returns, then at the very least he should do the same and shut down all the suspicion. In this sense, all the calls for resistance exist because he brought it on himself. :laugh:
-
@beep:
Face it, we thought 45 was crazy LONG before the 3rd debate. As it is, he just keeps proving (over and over and over) that we were correct. His 'administration' is now rife with nepotism and even Republicans want his Russia ties investigated (excluding Nunes who appears to be a WH flunkie). Trump is being investigated, not for political reasons, but for reasons so fucking obvious that his own party wants them looked into. He is dragging the GOP into a, dare I say it, swamp.
Well, first of all, to become president requires someone to be crazy.
But while people typically liked or disliked Trump.. they either loved or hated Hillary. Hillary's obsession with power and pandering to whomever will benefit her spans her lifetime.
It's not so much that Trump won the election.. but rather Hillary LOST the election. Many people who would normally vote democrat such as blacks decided to stay home and not vote because of such things as Hillary's deep devotion to former KKK leader Senator Robert Byrd. Many other people who would have stayed home decided to vote for Trump because they hated Hillary so much.
I would even suggest that Hillary is the ONLY democrat that Trump could have defeated. Sanders would have been the democratic candidate had the head of the DNC Wasserman not worked with Hillary's campaign to steal the candidacy from him. -
So- you're saying that the calls to investigate him are because people refuse to accept the election results? I'm sorry but that's a non sequitur. Specially when even members of his party have begun to voice their own support for investigating his ties to Russia.
There's more than enough evidence to warrant investigating him without it just being politically motivated. If we followed your flawed line of reasoning- then no one would ever be able to legitimately investigate any of his suspicious activities and ties because he'd just hide behind the defense of it being politically motivated and a "refusal to accept election results". I'm sorry but no, it doesn't work like that.
Besides, a lot of the controversy also comes from his own actions- he promised to release his tax returns after the elections and yet he still refuses to be transparent about it. If he's really got nothing to hide, and all the other presidential candidates have shown their own tax returns, then at the very least he should do the same and shut down all the suspicion. In this sense, all the calls for resistance exist because he brought it on himself. :laugh:
You can laugh all you like, but what you said is false. The liberal attacks didn't start yesterday, last week, nor last month. They started immediately after Trump won the election and have not let up. So that blows half your argument.
Presidential candidates are not required to produce their tax returns. Three modern presidents did not. Trump first said he would release his tax returns after his audit was over. Later he said he would release his tax returns IF Hillary produced the 30,000 emails that she illegally deleted AFTER being ordered to turn them over. She never did. Trump later said he would never release his tax returns. In fact, last week, when one year of his tax returns in which it was assumed that he paid no taxes was revealed on prime time TV… it turned out that he paid $35 million in taxes that year. That's a lot of tax! Also, Trump is the first modern president who made his money in business rather than political donations. It would be crazy for a business man to reveal his financial information to his competitors. So, there goes the other half of your argument.Oh, one other thing... while bickering about Trump not volunteering his tax returns.. how about Obama.. who didn't produce a birth certificate until 1.5 years AFTER being elected president? How is that possible? And the certificate he produced is questionable, but that is another topic.
-
You can laugh all you like, but what you said is false. The liberal attacks didn't start yesterday, last week, nor last month. They started immediately after Trump won the election and have not let up. So that blows half your argument.
Presidential candidates are not required to produce their tax returns. Three modern presidents did not. Trump first said he would release his tax returns after his audit was over. Later he said he would release his tax returns IF Hillary produced the 30,000 emails that she illegally deleted AFTER being ordered to turn them over. She never did. Trump later said he would never release his tax returns. In fact, last week, when one year of his tax returns in which it was assumed that he paid no taxes was revealed on prime time TV… it turned out that he paid $35 million in taxes that year. That's a lot of tax! Also, Trump is the first modern president who made his money in business rather than political donations. It would be crazy for a business man to reveal his financial information to his competitors. So, there goes the other half of your argument.Oh, one other thing... while bickering about Trump not volunteering his tax returns.. how about Obama.. who didn't produce a birth certificate until 1.5 years AFTER being elected president? How is that possible? And the certificate he produced is questionable, but that is another topic.
What exactly did I say that was false? The fact that there's enough proof of questionable ties to Russia to warrant an investigation? The fact that even members of his own party recognize the need for independent investigation?
And yes, they started immediately after the election because there was already proof of Russian meddling- and why should it let up? The investigation isn't done yet. So nothing you said "blows half my argument" at all. :laugh:
And as for the tax returns- why does a segment of Trump supporters such as yourself keep holding up Clinton and Obama like human shields to use their supposed faults and failings to excuse Trump? SO WHAT if Hillary never released her emails or Obama took a year and a half to release his birth certificate? Why the heck do they need to be connected at all? It's like saying I refuse to eat apples because my brother isn't eating his vegetables. Ludicrous!
Nothing that Obama or Clinton may or may not have done changes the fact that Trump is the first candidate in 40 years to refuse to release his returns. Why? Maybe because it could expose his ties to Russia for one. Can you counter that? No you can't but you could if the tax returns were available.
Oh- and the businessman defense? Please- that went out the window once he decided to run for PUBLIC OFFICE. He's a CIVIL SERVANT now, NOT a businessman. He was required by law to give up all his ties to his businesses the minute he accepted the mantle of President. So again, nothing you have stated has done anything to change or answer the argument I made earlier. Try harder, and be more aware. :blind:
-
You can laugh all you like, but what you said is false. The liberal attacks didn't start yesterday, last week, nor last month. They started immediately after Trump won the election and have not let up. So that blows half your argument.
Presidential candidates are not required to produce their tax returns. Three modern presidents did not. Trump first said he would release his tax returns after his audit was over. Later he said he would release his tax returns IF Hillary produced the 30,000 emails that she illegally deleted AFTER being ordered to turn them over. She never did. Trump later said he would never release his tax returns. In fact, last week, when one year of his tax returns in which it was assumed that he paid no taxes was revealed on prime time TV… it turned out that he paid $35 million in taxes that year. That's a lot of tax! Also, Trump is the first modern president who made his money in business rather than political donations. It would be crazy for a business man to reveal his financial information to his competitors. So, there goes the other half of your argument.Oh, one other thing... while bickering about Trump not volunteering his tax returns.. how about Obama.. who didn't produce a birth certificate until 1.5 years AFTER being elected president? How is that possible? And the certificate he produced is questionable, but that is another topic.
What exactly did I say that was false? The fact that there's enough proof of questionable ties to Russia to warrant an investigation? The fact that even members of his own party recognize the need for independent investigation?
And yes, they started immediately after the election because there was already proof of Russian meddling- and why should it let up? The investigation isn't done yet. So nothing you said "blows half my argument" at all. :laugh:
And as for the tax returns- why does a segment of Trump supporters such as yourself keep holding up Clinton and Obama like human shields to use their supposed faults and failings to excuse Trump? SO WHAT if Hillary never released her emails or Obama took a year and a half to release his birth certificate? Why the heck do they need to be connected at all? It's like saying I refuse to eat apples because my brother isn't eating his vegetables. Ludicrous!
Nothing that Obama or Clinton may or may not have done changes the fact that Trump is the first candidate in 40 years to refuse to release his returns. Why? Maybe because it could expose his ties to Russia for one. Can you counter that? No you can't but you could if the tax returns were available.
Oh- and the businessman defense? Please- that went out the window once he decided to run for PUBLIC OFFICE. He's a CIVIL SERVANT now, NOT a businessman. He was required by law to give up all his ties to his businesses the minute he accepted the mantle of President. So again, nothing you have stated has done anything to change or answer the argument I made earlier. Try harder, and be more aware. :blind:
It's amazing that everything you say is wrong. It is asinine to start assuming things such as any ties to Russia. There are no signs of that, and even if there was.. so what? Communism in Russia and the USSR ended roughly 22 years ago. It's far better to have Russia as a friend than an enemy. Speaking of ties to Russia… as Secretary of State, Hillary sold 20% of the USA's stockpile of uranium to Russia for her own benefit. If Russia ever nukes some country, they can thank Hillary for that.
Not being a politician is a big part of why Trump was elected president. He's the first president in modern times that is not a political serpent. Even the republican party fought very hard to prevent Trump from becoming president. It's refreshing to have a president who is not a puppet of a political party.
-
all the other presidential candidates have shown their own tax returns, then at the very least he should do the same and shut down all the suspicion.
As my momma used to say: If everyone else jumped off the Canal bridge, would you?
Just because others have, does not make a requirement. If it was so important, there would be a law!
-
Specially when even members of his party have begun to voice their own support for investigating his ties to Russia.
WHO exactly? The only people that have even suggested that are "Never Trump"ers.
There's more than enough evidence to warrant investigating him without it just being politically motivated.
Actually, there is more information in the public sphere that ties HRC and her family and associates with Russia than Trump.
-
As my momma used to say: If everyone else jumped off the Canal bridge, would you?
Just because others have, does not make a requirement. If it was so important, there would be a law!
Are you seriously comparing transparency with jumping off a bridge? How about this- if everyone brushed their teeth after meals, would you? See? :laugh:
There may not be a law- but that's mainly because RATIONAL people with nothing to hide, knew it was important so they did it without having to be told. Tell me- do YOU need a law to tell you to do good? To show integrity when running for the highest post in the land? To do the right thing? Come on! ::)
-
It's amazing that everything you say is wrong. It is asinine to start assuming things such as any ties to Russia. There are no signs of that, and even if there was.. so what? Communism in Russia and the USSR ended roughly 22 years ago. It's far better to have Russia as a friend than an enemy. Speaking of ties to Russia… as Secretary of State, Hillary sold 20% of the USA's stockpile of uranium to Russia for her own benefit. If Russia ever nukes some country, they can thank Hillary for that.
Not being a politician is a big part of why Trump was elected president. He's the first president in modern times that is not a political serpent. Even the republican party fought very hard to prevent Trump from becoming president. It's refreshing to have a president who is not a puppet of a political party.
First you say there are no signs of that, and then you say even if there are so what? Well if it wasn't such a big deal then Trump would have nothing to worry about would he? Flynn shouldn't have had to resign then? :laugh:
And again with using Hillary as your favorite shield- give it a rest. This is so stupid it's laughable- there was nothing criminal about what she did that was her executing her function as Secretary. If there were the Republicans would have locked her up! (BTW how's that promise of Trump coming along?) ::) She was investigated and exonerated. That's the process and Trump should be willing to go through the same.
And for the last time- what Hillary or Obama did does not protect Trump from whatever he's being accused of. It's like you're saying- give Trump a pass for his crimes because Hillary's a crook too! That's just ridiculous yet you keep doing it.
-
The calls for impeachment are not because Trump's opponents are sore losers. Trump has been in clear violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution since the day he took office, just from what we know from publically available information of Trump's business dealings. As law professor and ACLU National Legal Director David Cole explained:
But the Constitution subjects the president to a conflict-of-interest law: the so-called “emoluments” clause. That clause provides that no federal officeholder may, absent express approval by Congress, accept “any present, Emolument,…of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” It is designed to ensure that federal officials, from the president on down, serve only the interest of the American public, and are not compromised by foreign influence. In 1787, Charles Pinckney of South Carolina proposed the provision at the Constitutional Convention, urging “the necessity of preserving foreign Ministers & other officers of the US independent of external influence.”1 At the Virginia convention to ratify the Constitution, Edmund Jennings Randolph explained that the clause was “provided to prevent corruption.”2
–--------------
and later:But public records establish that his organization is involved in deals and contracts around the globe. Many of those ventures stand to gain from the actions of foreign governments or their agents—including investments involving foreign state-owned companies, government contracts or permits, lease agreements, or even overnight stays or events held at Trump hotels, golf courses, or other properties.
The single largest tenant of Trump Tower is the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, a wholly state-owned company. Trump’s major business partner in the Philippines was named by President Rodrigo Duterte as special envoy to the United States. Trump has ongoing business projects throughout the world, including in Argentina and the nation of Georgia. He receives millions of dollars in licensing revenue from a Trump hotel in Panama. And then, of course, there is Russia, where Trump has long had extensive business dealings, and where government officials were recently overheard by our intelligence agencies celebrating Trump’s election, after a campaign in which Russia hacked and then leaked confidential e-mails from the Democratic National Committee, among other Democratic organizations, in order to boost Trump’s chances.
-
Trump doesn't accept the results. Why should Hillary or anybody else? Trump is President by default due to a fraudulent election that was full of illegal votes. He may be the only candidate in history to declare himself to be the illegitimate winner.
-
Its not even been 100 days . …
-
@beep:
Face it, we thought 45 was crazy LONG before the 3rd debate.
Well that's the understatement of the century. Most people have known he's an unhinged nutjob since the last millennia.
It was further solidified after 9/11 when he gloated that he had the tallest tower in New York again.
-
@beep:
Face it, we thought 45 was crazy LONG before the 3rd debate.
Well that's the understatement of the century. Most people have known he's an unhinged nutjob since the last millennia.
It was further solidified after 9/11 when he gloated that he had the tallest tower in New York again.
For every faus pax that Trump has made.. Hillary has made 100.
