New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

What a lying sack of **** !

Mick

The Right is always right
1. Yates was fired for refusing to violate the Constitution.
Yates was fired for misconduct for refusing to enforce the law. The law that has since been validated by the Supreme Court. Facts matter. Left wing psychosis does not.

2. She warned the administration before she warned the public.
She told the administration in LATE JANUARY that he had been lying which lead to his termination shortly thereafter. Apparently he was under FBI investigation for an extended period before that. Obama's FBI failed to notify the President-elect of this fact. That's the problem.

3. Obama and Flynn both warned the transition team before Trump took office.
Obama warned nothing about being under investigation. He just "wasn't a fan". Flynn told McGahn in JANUARY but it was shrugged off because Flynn said there was nothing to it and Obama's DOJ was not talking about it.

4. Yes, Cohen got a plea bargain. But the lesser charges to which he pleaded still had to be a crime.
Because a prosecutor presses charges doesn't mean a crime has been committed. Go look at the case of John Edwards as Exhibit A. Like Edwards, if the only issue had been campaign finance violations it would have likely gone nowhere. Cohen had 6 other felonies he was dealing and a possible 40 year prison sentence if he fought it. Much better to take the plea deal and clear the docket. Doesn't mean jackshit about whether the DOJ could have proven the campaign finance case in court. Previous precedent says they couldn't.....and they probably wouldn't have even tried without the other stuff to nail him on.

Dummy.
 

Nutty Cortez

Dummy (D) NY
Yates was fired for misconduct for refusing to enforce the law. The law that has since been validated by the Supreme Court. Facts matter. Left wing psychosis does not.



She told the administration in LATE JANUARY that he had been lying which lead to his termination shortly thereafter. Apparently he was under FBI investigation for an extended period before that. Obama's FBI failed to notify the President-elect of this fact. That's the problem.



Obama warned nothing about being under investigation. He just "wasn't a fan". Flynn told McGahn in JANUARY but it was shrugged off because Flynn said there was nothing to it and Obama's DOJ was not talking about it.



Because a prosecutor presses charges doesn't mean a crime has been committed. Go look at the case of John Edwards as Exhibit A. Like Edwards, if the only issue had been campaign finance violations it would have likely gone nowhere. Cohen had 6 other felonies he was dealing and a possible 40 year prison sentence if he fought it. Much better to take the plea deal and clear the docket. Doesn't mean jackshit about whether the DOJ could have proven the campaign finance case in court. Previous precedent says they couldn't.....and they probably wouldn't have even tried without the other stuff to nail him on.

Dummy.

Looks like @EatTheRich is wrong on about everything he posts.
 

Mick

The Right is always right
No he had not.

Mid-November through December 19, 2016.....
Blah, blah, blah. Why are you continuing with this nonsense? A Presidential candidate is not the same as the President-elect. The victimized spouse of someone being under investigation is not the same as the actual individual being under investigation. A public investigation that everyone knows about (like Clinton emails) is not the same as Michael Flynn's. These instances are not remotely similar. Yet, in your low IQ fit you've tried to argue they are. This is why you are a laughing stock on this forum. Low IQ Putz.

Lulz



With Flynn and Kushner trying to set up communication inside the Russian embassy in order to hide their activities from US intelligence. Tipping off Trump would be tipping off Flynn and his cohorts.
Damn, your IQ is certainly low. You are still arguing those BASIC FACTS. Lulz
So, you think they were traveling to the Russian embassy now? ROFL. You get dumber by the post. And U.S. intelligence? Shouldn't U.S. intelligence be trying to PROTECT the communications of the transition team? The policitized Obama DOJ was committing crimes left and right by leaking to the press (like Flynn's perfectly legal conversations). Flynn and Kushner did nothing wrong. They did what they were suppose to. The Obama DOJ broke the law by releasing those private classified conversations to the media. Facts do matter.





Obama surely should not have tipped Trump off.
Because he and his DOJ were corrupt and incompetent? Surely the President-elect should know about his national security adviser. Unless of course they are engaging in politically motivated coverups and witch hunts. Then they wouldn't......

Trump should have performed proper vetting.
He can't vet anyone without getting proper FBI feedback. Jesus Christ, this is the ENTIRE point. Lulz


Yates came forward when she observed a crime being committed by Flynn. It was likely a crime Trump knew Flynn was committing. Because it was likely Flynn doing Trump's bidding by contacting the Russians after the sanctions and the keep that hidden. Now if Trump was willing to let a crime slide, he was surely not worried about an investigation into other suspected activities.
Flynn was committing no crime by talking about sanctions with Kislyak during the transition. That's what the transition team does. Flynn got into problems when he lied to Pence and the FBI about it. The crime committed was when Obama's corrupt DOJ leaked those conversations to the press. Why was Yates trying to pursue bogus Logan Act job on Flynn while ignoring the corruption on her own department? Obama and his DOJ were the epitome of evil.

Here is how you know when a excuse has reached its end. When you trying to point to someone else's dirty deeds in order to justify the dirty deeds of those you are defending . The facts is we are talking about what Trump did.
If it was as black and white as you are saying then it'd be an easy call. I'm telling you why Democrats in Congress have dropped it like a hot potato and it is now a dead issue. You have a difficult time with that.

Facts matter. psychosis does not.



.
And that somehow makes his less guilty of the crime he plead to ?
See my post to EatHisOwnDung above. Game. Set. Match.

Wake up, dummy.





He said that only included the actual hacking and the attacks launched by the IRA.
Mueller also suggested that an investigation by the FBI might turn up a different story on whether or not there was cooperation between the two.
Mueller WAS the 2 year unlimited FBI investigation you low IQ POS. ROFL!!!!! Mueller didn't say anything about a "different story". He said the President might have believed his perfectly legal actions were illegal based upon wailing going on.

Christ almighty, you're an idiot.


And you wonder why your part of the electorate consists of the low IQ, mentally ill, criminals, and miscreants? Facts completely evade your pea brains. Lulz



Again, this is meaningless because he did not, live or attend high school. or solely do his drinking, in Maryland, nor was he being asked about his drinking or behavior in Maryland.
He wasn't legal to drink on school property either way so where he went to school was meaningless. Most of the students in his school were from Washington DC. Most of the parties were in D.C. It was legal to drink there for his entire time in high school.....and most of high school in Maryland. Here is his quote AGAIN because you still can't grasp it:

"My friends and I sometimes got together and had parties on weekends. The drinking age was 18 in Maryland for most of my time in high school and was 18 in D.C. for all of my time in high school. I drank beer with my friends. Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer. I still like beer."

Good God, you dung for brains dullard. Lulz




He was not being question about his activities in DC.
True. Because he detailed in his OPENING statement. He had not been asked a single question about it and he made it clear as day:
"My friends and I sometimes got together and had parties on weekends. The drinking age was 18 in Maryland for most of my time in high school and was 18 in D.C. for all of my time in high school. I drank beer with my friends. Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer. I still like beer."


I'll help you along a little bit. What happened on July 1, 1982 does NOT matter on location. The same people who could drink in Washington DC on July 1, 1982 could drink in Maryland on July 1, 1982. Those who couldn't drink in DC on July 1, 1982 couldn't drink in Maryland on July 1, 1982.

The Maryland law went into effect on July 1, 1982. Those who were ALREADY 18 by July 1, 1982 were still legal to drink. They were grandfathered in because you really can't say "you're legal now.....but you won't be in 2 weeks". Therefore, if someone was 18 years old on July 1, 1982 they were STILL legal in Maryland. And they were legal in D.C. Yet, you posted a an-alt left propaganda pic which pretended like this wasn't true and you competely fell for it!

Bwahahahahahahahahahahah. Christ, you must be mentally retarded. There can be other explanation for this idiocy, right? There are freaks in your electorate.

Lulz
 

Mick

The Right is always right
One more time. Was this in DC ?


As detailed above based upon the laws in Maryland and Washington DC it does not matter at all. Same people legal in both places on July 1, 1982. Let's not even get into the fact that says nothing about what was going on.

Any further questions our resident low IQ clown?
 

Mick

The Right is always right
Just keep the topic to the one the thread is about. The site is not allowing me to post. It's likely due to the long winded insult rants you are including in the post. It amazing the mods are letting you get away with it.
If there was any serious moderation you would have been the first to get the boot a long time ago, troll. Your whinings are of a beaten, downtrodden, desperate little man.
 

Mick

The Right is always right
Why did Trump try to get Comey to "let Flynn go " and even fired him because Comey would not ?
Trump fired Comey because Comey didn't "let Flynn go"? Got a valid link to that assertion? You state things as if they are facts when in reality they've come from your alt-left cesspool of lies, corruption, and fake news.

Lulz
 

Mick

The Right is always right
If Trump actually read the news or watched anything but Fox, he'd have known Flynn was fired back in 2014 and why. He'd also know that after having been fired Flynn went to work at RT (Russia Today).....
Flynn was fired by Obama because they did not get along. Obama only got along with those who would further the corruption (see his DOJ as exhibit A). That was not a reason for anything.

Secondly, why would Flynn working with Russia be a problem? Shouldn't we want people that have connections and can work with various governments? You guys and your Russian paranoia. It's actually quite humorous to see how mentally ill it's made you all.

Lulz
 

Spamature

President
Trump fired Comey because Comey didn't "let Flynn go"? Got a valid link to that assertion? You state things as if they are facts when in reality they've come from your alt-left cesspool of lies, corruption, and fake news.
The firing sure was a coincidence, wouldn't you say ?

During the weeks leading up to May 9, grand jury subpoenas were issued by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Alexandria, Virginia, to associates of Michael Flynn for the purpose of obtaining records relating to the investigation of Russia's role in the election. News outlets became aware of these subpoenas on May 9.[36]

Trump's dismissal of Comey on May 9, 2017—four years into Comey's ten-year term[27]—raised the issue of possible political interference by a sitting president into an existing investigation by a leading law enforcement agency,[27] as well as other issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_James_Comey


Comey as testified that Trump wanted to end the investigation and let Flynn go.

I guess you forgot how the whole Mueller investigation started.

Lulz
 

FakeName

Governor
he is a libber so how could he be correct
"he is a libber so how could he be correct"

You couldn't have more perfectly illustrated the problem with this country if you had tried.

You might as well have said "party before country" or "tribe before truth".

Well here is something you ought to think about:

We are all Americans and facts matter no matter which side likes them.
 

Spamature

President
Secondly, why would Flynn working with Russia be a problem?
If it wasn't a problem then why did Flynn try to hide his income from Russia. Is it because nothing says, "nothing to see here" like your national security adviser being on the enemy's payroll.

Or how the GOP Oversight chairman put it:

Chaffetz said he saw “no data” in the documents he reviewed that confirmed Flynn had complied with the law.


“As a former military officer, you simply cannot take money from Russia, Turkey or anybody else,” Chaffetz said. “And it appears as if he did take that money, it was inappropriate and there are repercussions for a violation of law.”


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/25/michael-flynn-russia-payment-house-panel-investigation
 

Spamature

President
Blah, blah, blah. Why are you continuing with this nonsense? A Presidential candidate is not the same as the President-elect. The victimized spouse of someone being under investigation is not the same as the actual individual being under investigation. A public investigation that everyone knows about (like Clinton emails) is not the same as Michael Flynn's. These instances are not remotely similar.

The EC vote is the end of the election.


Yet, in your low IQ fit you've tried to argue . This is why you are a laughing stock on this forum. Low IQ Putz.

Lulz





So, you think they were traveling to the Russian embassy now? ROFL. You get dumber by the post. And U.S. intelligence? Shouldn't U.S. intelligence be trying to PROTECT the communications of the transition team? The policitized Obama DOJ was committing crimes left and right by leaking to the press (like Flynn's perfectly legal conversations). Flynn and Kushner did nothing wrong. They did what they were suppose to.
I never said they traveled anywhere. The Russians turn their request to use Russian facilities and equipment down on spot.

The Obama DOJ broke the law by releasing those private classified conversations to the media.
It was the intel services that recorded the conversation between Flynn and the Russians because they monitor Russian activities. The POTUS has the right to release gathered intelligence if he so pleases. But that is besides the point. Especially since you and Trump are whining about the investigation into Flynn being kept to the investigators. Now you complaining part of it became public.

Facts do matter.

Just not to you.






Because he and his DOJ were corrupt and incompetent? Surely the President-elect should know about his national security adviser. Unless of course they are engaging in politically motivated coverups and witch hunts. Then they wouldn't......
If it were a witch hunt then why whine about not having a chance to make another choice.


He can't vet anyone without getting proper FBI feedback.
You surely can vet anybody if you don't vet them. It's apparent Trump didn't vet Flynn.

Jesus Christ, this is the ENTIRE point. Lulz




Flynn was committing no crime by talking about sanctions with Kislyak during the transition. That's what the transition team does. Flynn got into problems when he lied to Pence and the FBI about it. The crime committed was when Obama's corrupt DOJ leaked those conversations to the press. Why was Yates trying to pursue bogus Logan Act job on Flynn while ignoring the corruption on her own department? Obama and his DOJ were the epitome of evil
.
Lying to Pence isn't a crime. I bet Trump lies to him every time he sees him. And Pence is surely lying to himself and everyone else when he gives out his gushing praises of the teabagger messiah.


If it was as black and white as you are saying then it'd be an easy call. I'm telling you why Democrats in Congress have dropped it like a hot potato and it is now a dead issue.
No they have not.

You have a difficult time with that.

Facts matter. psychosis does not.



.


See my post to EatHisOwnDung above. Game. Set. Match.
He plead guilty. Just because Trump hires criminals in all aspects of his life doesn't change that fact.
Wake up, dummy.







Mueller WAS the 2 year unlimited FBI investigation you low IQ POS. ROFL!!!!! Mueller didn't say anything about a "different story". He said the President might have believed his perfectly legal actions were illegal based upon wailing going on.
No it was not unlimited. He says he limited his investigation into the Russian attack and whether the Trumpies were involved in it with the Russian govt, and whether Trump obstructed justice in the FBI investigation into that attack.

Christ almighty, you're an idiot.


And you wonder why your part of the electorate consists of the low IQ, mentally ill, criminals, and miscreants? Facts completely evade your pea brains. Lulz




He wasn't legal to drink on school property either way so where he went to school was meaningless. Most of the students in his school were from Washington DC. Most of the parties were in D.C. It was legal to drink there for his entire time in high school.....and most of high school in Maryland. Here is his quote AGAIN because you still can't grasp it:

"My friends and I sometimes got together and had parties on weekends. The drinking age was 18 in Maryland for most of my time in high school and was 18 in D.C. for all of my time in high school. I drank beer with my friends. Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer. I still like beer."
Get it through your head. It was NEVER legal for him to drink where he lived until he was 21.

Good God, you dung for brains dullard. Lulz






True. Because he detailed in his OPENING statement. He had not been asked a single question about it and he made it clear as day:
"My friends and I sometimes got together and had parties on weekends. The drinking age was 18 in Maryland for most of my time in high school and was 18 in D.C. for all of my time in high school. I drank beer with my friends. Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer. I still like beer."




I'll help you along a little bit. What happened on July 1, 1982 does NOT matter on location. The same people who could drink in Washington DC on July 1, 1982 could drink in Maryland on July 1, 1982. Those who couldn't drink in DC on July 1, 1982 couldn't drink in Maryland on July 1, 1982.

The Maryland law went into effect on July 1, 1982. Those who were ALREADY 18 by July 1, 1982 were still legal to drink. They were grandfathered in because you really can't say "you're legal now.....but you won't be in 2 weeks". Therefore, if someone was 18 years old on July 1, 1982 they were STILL legal in Maryland. And they were legal in D.C. Yet, you posted a an-alt left propaganda pic which pretended like this wasn't true and you competely fell for it!
From his testimony:
KAVANAUGH: Yes, we drank beer. My friends and I, the boys and girls. Yes, we drank beer. I liked beer. Still like beer. We drank beer. The drinking age, as I noted, was 18, so the seniors were legal, senior year in high school, people were legal to drink, and we — yeah, we drank beer, and I said sometimes — sometimes probably had too many beers, and sometimes other people had too many beers.
It was never legal for him to drink in high school. It was never legal to drink in Maryland until he was 21.

Do you understand that he is lying.

If not ?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahah. Christ, you must be mentally retarded. There can be other explanation for this idiocy, right? There are freaks in your electorate.

Lulz

I am done with you on everything except the topic of the thread.
 
Last edited:

EatTheRich

President
Yates was fired for misconduct for refusing to enforce the law. The law that has since been validated by the Supreme Court. Facts matter. Left wing psychosis does not.



She told the administration in LATE JANUARY that he had been lying which lead to his termination shortly thereafter. Apparently he was under FBI investigation for an extended period before that. Obama's FBI failed to notify the President-elect of this fact. That's the problem.



Obama warned nothing about being under investigation. He just "wasn't a fan". Flynn told McGahn in JANUARY but it was shrugged off because Flynn said there was nothing to it and Obama's DOJ was not talking about it.



Because a prosecutor presses charges doesn't mean a crime has been committed. Go look at the case of John Edwards as Exhibit A. Like Edwards, if the only issue had been campaign finance violations it would have likely gone nowhere. Cohen had 6 other felonies he was dealing and a possible 40 year prison sentence if he fought it. Much better to take the plea deal and clear the docket. Doesn't mean jackshit about whether the DOJ could have proven the campaign finance case in court. Previous precedent says they couldn't.....and they probably wouldn't have even tried without the other stuff to nail him on.

Dummy.
1. The policy Yates refused to enforce was actually found unconstitutional.
2. The question is not whether he would have been convicted of those crimes on the merits. The question is whether what he pleaded guilty to was in fact against the law or not.
3. Can we have a new rule that police must always inform suspects and possible co-conspirators that they are under investigation? Because that is the standard younsay should have been followed with Trump.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Flynn was fired by Obama because they did not get along. Obama only got along with those who would further the corruption (see his DOJ as exhibit A). That was not a reason for anything.

Secondly, why would Flynn working with Russia be a problem? Shouldn't we want people that have connections and can work with various governments? You guys and your Russian paranoia. It's actually quite humorous to see how mentally ill it's made you all.

Lulz
If you were paying attention you would know about all the turn over at the Trump administration.
 

redtide

Mayor
"he is a libber so how could he be correct"

You couldn't have more perfectly illustrated the problem with this country if you had tried.

You might as well have said "party before country" or "tribe before truth".

Well here is something you ought to think about:

We are all Americans and facts matter no matter which side likes them.
not party but ideology. Todays libbers are all about how much they can steal from others and how much they can force US to comply with the illness that is in their minds. If JFK (democrat) was alive today you people would look at him as a right wing extremist.
 

FakeName

Governor
not party but ideology. Todays libbers are all about how much they can steal from others and how much they can force US to comply with the illness that is in their minds. If JFK (democrat) was alive today you people would look at him as a right wing extremist.
You need to get out more. You should meet more of your fellow Americans who are liberal and find out what they actually want instead of repeating lies about it.
 

redtide

Mayor
You need to get out more. You should meet more of your fellow Americans who are liberal and find out what they actually want instead of repeating lies about it.
you mean all the folks who want to force US to kneel to the climate gods and to sit quietly while while they rob US blind?
 

redtide

Mayor
Straw man.
Really? So most of you poeple do not want to make US submit to climate change policies, laws, taxes and regulations? What about entitlements, are you now saying that we can stop the wholesale theft by eliminating entitlements? Well then I must have missed that memo as I have heard non of your ilk even suggesting that
 
Top