Liberal Forum

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 11:34 am » wrote:
These people don't know the rules and don't care about the rules.

White House Says Kellyanne Conway Won’t Be Disciplined for Ivanka Infomercial

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 3:15 pm » wrote:Update to this post: http://liberalforum.net/viewtopic.php?f ... 60#p888473



On November 30th, 2016, Preet Bharara was called to Trump Tower and asked by the incoming POTUS and his incoming AG if would stay on in his job as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of NY.

Yesterday he was asked to resign.
He refused to resign and was fired today.

Preet Bharara has prosecuted nearly 100 Wall Street executives, reached historic settlements and fines with the four largest banks in the US and and closed multibillion-dollar hedge funds for illegal activities including insider trading.

He also prosecuted New York state politicians, including the Speaker of the New York State Assembly, Sheldon Silver (D) and the Majority Leader of State Senate, Dean Skelos (R) and at one time he even threatened to prosecute the governor of NY Andrew Cuomo (D) for alleged corruption.

Aside from prosecuting terrorists his office convicted more than 1,000 people charged in a large-scale drug and gang takedown.

And he also handled the criminal prosecutions of several employees of Bernie Madoff’s firm.

Bharara leaves behind him an upcoming trial scheduled for a month from now to decide the case of Joe Percoco, a former top aide to Gov. Andrew Cuomo who is under indictment for bid rigging and bribery, and an investigation into the fundraising activities of the current mayor of NYC Bill de Blasio.

When it comes to public corruption this guy is a bulldog and not afraid to go after members of either political party.

Seems to me that if you really wanted to 'drain the swamp' he is exactly who you would want as the US Attorney for such an important district.

So why did they first ask him to stay and then fire him?

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 3:16 pm » wrote: I don't sell it.
I give it away for free.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 2:41 pm » wrote:Bring your concerned to the dems in this article:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa ... n-n2296924

But I'll give you credit. Your creative writing classes have paid off. That is top quality spin in your posts.

A month into its sweeping investigation into the Kremlin’s efforts to undermine the US election, the Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to answer all those questions — publicly, coherently, and fast.

As the days tick by, they’re less and less sure they’ll be able to.

Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active,

informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives, though investigators have only just begun reviewing raw intelligence.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 1:33 pm » wrote:At any rate it appears the Russian link with trump is a false story.

roadkill » 11 Mar 2017 3:40 pm » wrote:And even that doesn't work.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 1:00 pm » wrote:Yet misty claims to be offended when I say she posted a snippet of an article.
Very odd indeed.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 12:25 pm » wrote:What is wrong with you reading skills?

Sgt Bilko » 11 Mar 2017 12:59 pm » wrote:So you admit you sell access to your body to any man with money!! Glad to see you admit it!!!

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 3:42 pm » wrote: Okay , so here's the deal.
I have repeatedly said that I do not know if there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians in regards to the election.

You have pretty much said, "nothing to see here folks. Move along."

So as your proof that there's nothing to see here you post a piece from a right wing website entitled: Dead End: Senate Intelligence Dems Admit There May Be ZERO Evidence Of Collusion Between Russians And Trump Campaign.

You do know what the word 'MAY' means, right?

The article goes on to quote something from Buzzfeed which says:
So your own source says that they have only just begun reviewing the raw intelligence, and the questions have not been answered and you take that as a definitive nothing to see here.
Your standard of proof seems to be a lot lower than the standard of proof that you seem to hold me to.

IMO, they more than likely will not find any smoking gun here, but you can hardly declare something over until the investigations are complete.

And these are real investigations, not alleged ones.

Okay. I admit. That was pretty snarky.


P.S. If you're going to use right wing sites like Townhall as a source, don't complain when I use sources like Raw Story.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 12:25 pm » wrote: :
What is wrong with you reading skills?

Lmmfao!

I clearly state I don't trust the numbers. Clearly. What part don't you understand?

I then go and apply the same arguments I used u dear Obama and apply them to trump. What part of that do you not understand?

Your question was answered yesterday before you asked it today.
the proper response from you should have been "I apologize Huey, I forgot about your post from yesterday"

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 3:49 pm » wrote: Nothing that I know of.
Did you ever stop to think that it might be your writing skills that are the problem?

I'm just sayin'.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 4:12 pm » wrote: Misty, this isn't about what YOU HAVE PERSONALLY SAID. LMMFAO!
This is about your feigned ignorance concerning whether or no their was an investigation.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 4:15 pm » wrote:Sprry mosty you are busted. You tried to make it seem I was not applying the same standard to trump that o did to Obama. That is why you deleted most of the quote.

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 3:47 pm » wrote: What you read as me being offended is really me breaking your balls.

This was one of my old avatars.

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 4:20 pm » wrote: I am growing really weary of you accusing me of deceptive editing.

And don't call me 'Mosty.'

Anyway it's time to feed my man, so later.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 12:25 pm » wrote: :
What is wrong with you reading skills?

Lmmfao!

I clearly state I don't trust the numbers. Clearly. What part don't you understand?

I then go and apply the same arguments I used u dear Obama and apply them to trump. What part of that do you not understand?

Your question was answered yesterday before you asked it today.
the proper response from you should have been "I apologize Huey, I forgot about your post from yesterday"

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 11:35 am » wrote: So do believe that the numbers were fake until this month?

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 12:25 pm » wrote: :
What is wrong with you reading skills?

Lmmfao!

I clearly state I don't trust the numbers. Clearly. What part don't you understand?

I then go and apply the same arguments I used u dear Obama and apply them to trump. What part of that do you not understand?

Your question was answered yesterday before you asked it today.
the proper response from you should have been "I apologize Huey, I forgot about your post from yesterday"

Cannonpointer » 11 Mar 2017 3:34 pm » wrote:Let's not be vindictive, shall we? The hayseed was probably functioning on 8 hours sleep (for the week), apologized, promised not to do it again.
I'm good with that. You good with that? She got a talking to.

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 5:59 pm » wrote: Relax.
I didn't say she should be put in prison.
I'll cut her some slack, even though she never cuts anybody else any slack, unless they're paying her.

Now if we can only get her to stop spewing alternative facts.

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 4:26 pm » wrote:How could I be plainer, misty? So yes, I am accusing you of deceptive editing because you continue to ignore comments that bust you.

#ShePersisted » 11 Mar 2017 6:22 pm » wrote: I always find it odd when people feel the need to talk about how they busted someone on a political forum.

I'm about out of patience with you, and you're starting to get on my last nerve.

When it comes to posting you seem to have the stamina of a mental patient.
I no sooner respond to one of your posts before you are posting another one and demanding answers.

It seems a little needy.

And the expression 'beating a dead horse' comes to mind.

I don't see why you can't just accept the fact that we will never agree on some things.
And I'm okay with that.

Like the OP says, this thread is like a blog where I post stuff that interests me and vent about it.

I really have no desire to get into long protracted arguments with anyone.

That's why I have been mostly sticking to my two regular threads lately, and don't start any new threads.

Capisce?

Huey » 11 Mar 2017 6:26 pm » wrote: stop lying misty. I am laughing my **** *** off at you. The problem is, bane, you wish to turn every disagreement personal than like a **** snowflake you whine to high heaven when that is turned around on you. You get what you give.

You have twice lied about what I have posted in as many days. I am not Hilo nor golfboy. I am not going to call you a whore. I will post what was really said. Now, did I or did I not say that I did not trust the employment number CONTRARY to what you posted today ? Yes or no misty? Jus because you are the senior moderator does not mean you have the right to lie.

Capisce?