Liberal Forum

This one lies as shamelessly as his old man.

Termin8tor » 13 Feb 2020 3:22 pm » wrote:

Misty » 13 Feb 2020 2:03 pm » wrote:He's attacking a juror now.

The juror is or was an attorney with vehement bias against Stone who should have recused herself.
There should be legal action taken against her.

What proof do you have of that?

And, if that's the case, then why didn't Stone's lawyer strike her?

Attacking and smearing jurors now.
How **** low are you willing to go?
Is there any bottom?

Sniffles tagged FOX News and Fox & Friends in his Tweet, so obviously they are pushing this ****.
So are they going to out this juror's identity now so Sniffles goons can go after her?

Misty » 13 Feb 2020 11:42 am » wrote: Good for you.
Do you also say something when it goes down?
I don't think I've ever seen that.

I was responding to your remark on the market. If it makes you happy I was down 5 figures a few days ago.

Trump just put a 29-year-old fired over allegations of financial crimes in charge of all personnel decisions.

John McEntee, President Donald Trump's body man who was fired in 2018 amid an investigation into allegations of financial crimes, will lead the Presidential Personnel Office, multiple news outlets reported Thursday.

When he was the White House chief of staff, John Kelly forced McEntee out over issues with the young aide's security clearance.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the issues were related to online gambling problems and mishandling of his taxes.

McEntee was also the focus of a financial-crimes investigation by the Department of Homeland Security, CNN reported.

McEntee, 29, who joined Trump's small team early in his presidential campaign, was escorted out of the White House in March 2018 without being allowed to collect his belongings, including his jacket, The Journal reported.

"It's not going to be great for morale," a White House official told The Journal about McEntee's firing.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-p ... ssion=true

crimsongulf » 13 Feb 2020 6:50 pm » wrote:

Misty » 13 Feb 2020 11:42 am » wrote:Good for you.
Do you also say something when it goes down?
I don't think I've ever seen that.

I was responding to your remark on the market. If it makes you happy I was down 5 figures a few days ago.

Why would that make me happy?

Misty » 13 Feb 2020 7:21 pm » wrote: Why would that make me happy?

Win some, lose some.

if you are in the market actively, there are good days, bad days. If I can average 8% annually my son and his family are going to inherit a **** full.

395 bills including 10 election security bills.
Not like we need those or anything.

395 bills including 10 election security bills.
Not like we need those or anything.

.

.

Oh look, an Official Democrat Talking Point Lie, that you claim you never tell.

There were no "election security bills."

Every bill with that label would have stacked the deck in Democrats' favor.

Many would have made election fraud easier.

And every one of the 395 bills was so far left none were intended to pass, and Pelosi knew that full well.

McConnell is doing an excellent job as Senate Majority leader; passing bills that actually are good for the country.

Termin8tor » 14 Feb 2020 1:45 pm » wrote:

BREAKING: AG Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Abusive Case Against General Flynn

Gee, I wonder why Barr has to keep hand picking all these 'outside' prosecutors.
Looks like he has to shop around the country for a prosecutor willing to do his (or Sniffles) bidding.

Termin8tor » 14 Feb 2020 7:23 am » wrote:

395 bills including 10 election security bills.
Not like we need those or anything.

Oh look, an Official Democrat Talking Point Lie, that you claim you never tell.
There were no "election security bills."
Every bill with that label would have stacked the deck in Democrats' favor.
Many would have made election fraud easier.

How would a bill that would require campaigns to report offers of foreign election assistance to the FBI, and another that would require campaigns to report such offers to the Federal Election Commission stack the deck in Democrats' favor?

Are you saying that Republicans would welcome foreign assistance in their campaigns?

Don't answer that. It's rhetorical.
We already know they would.

And how would a bill that would ban voting machines from being connected to the internet make election fraud easier?
That makes no sense.
It's not like the Russians would ever try to hack into our systems, right?


Republicans have no intentions of making elections more secure, because they want to be free to cheat, like they always do.

McConnell reiterates that Senate would confirm a Supreme Court nominee if there's a vacancy this year.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Thursday again reiterated his position that the GOP-led Senate would confirm a nominee to any Supreme Court vacancy that occurred this election year, despite leaving a seat vacant in 2016 and preventing President Barack Obama's nominee from consideration.

"If you're asking me a hypothetical ... we would fill it," the Kentucky Republican told Fox News Thursday.

Following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, McConnell had blocked the Senate from holding a hearing on Obama's nominee, DC circuit judge Merrick Garland.

McConnell had argued at the time that "this nomination ought to be made by the President we're in the process of electing this year."
[....]
On Fox News Friday, McConnell argued that the situation is different now than in 2016, because the Senate and the White House were controlled by different parties.

This time, both are controlled by Republicans.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/02/14/poli ... ssion=true

Where in the Constitution does it say that in an election year a president can only nominate someone to the Supreme court if his party controls the Senate?

What a bunch of ****.

Misty » 14 Feb 2020 3:13 pm » wrote:McConnell reiterates that Senate would confirm a Supreme Court nominee if there's a vacancy this year.

Where in the Constitution does it say that in an election year a president can only nominate someone to the Supreme court if his party controls the Senate?

What a bunch of ****.

Speaking of ****, he didn't claim anything about the Constitution, psycho.

He's simply following over 100 years of political precedent. If the opposing party controls the Senate, that president won't get a nominee appointed to SCOTUS.

Say, who controls the Senate?

Guaranteed, 100%, take it to the bank.....Sniffles did NOT write that.






What he said.

Termin8tor » 14 Feb 2020 3:40 pm » wrote:

Misty » 14 Feb 2020 2:18 pm » wrote:How would a bill that would require campaigns to report offers of foreign election assistance to the FBI, and another that would require campaigns to report such offers to the Federal Election Commission stack the deck in Democrats' favor?
Are you saying that Republicans would welcome foreign assistance in their campaigns?
Don't answer that. It's rhetorical.
We already know they would.

If you make a claim, it's safe to say that the opposite is true.

Yet you didn't even attempt to counter my claim.
Go figure.

Misty » 14 Feb 2020 4:19 pm » wrote: Yet you didn't even attempt to counter my claim.
Go figure.

He never does FACTS are like KRYPTONITE to H8er

Termin8tor » 14 Feb 2020 4:25 pm » wrote:

TRAITOR that you are you rell this LIE AGAIN which I have shown before DIRECTLY originated with Russian Military INtelligence and is NOTHING but a ridiculous LIE

Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russians via Steele, who testified that one of his sources was a Russian ex-intelligence officer.

You are a LIAR no such collaboration EXISTED. Steeles sources from LONG being a Russia expert from Brithis military intelligence doesn't change the FACT he was employed by an AMERICAN COMPANY and the BASIS for this COMPLETELY DEBUNKED LIE is to try to make ANY investigation into Trump/Russia into collaborating WITH Russia which Trump campaign DID and the Clinton campaign DID NOT. You are a TRAITOR

And Obama officials, HRC campaign officials, DNC officials and State Dept officials colluded with Ukraine to interfere in the 2016 election.

You are a LIAR that never happened which is why you NEVER TRY to substantiate the LIES you tell it would be too EASY to destroy the STUPIDITY of your claims so you just teLl THE LIE the one that ORIGINATED with Russian Military Intelligence which you repeat because you are a TRAITOR you want to help Russia WEAKEN America

Termin8tor » 14 Feb 2020 3:37 pm » wrote:

Misty » 14 Feb 2020 3:13 pm » wrote:McConnell reiterates that Senate would confirm a Supreme Court nominee if there's a vacancy this year.
Where in the Constitution does it say that in an election year a president can only nominate someone to the Supreme court if his party controls the Senate?
What a bunch of ****.

Speaking of ****, he didn't claim anything about the Constitution, psycho.
He's simply following over 100 years of political precedent. If the opposing party controls the Senate, that president won't get a nominee appointed to SCOTUS.
Say, who controls the Senate?

The Constitution says nothing about which party controls the Senate.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Appointments Clause, empowers the president to nominate and, with the confirmation (advice and consent) of the United States Senate, to appoint public officials, including justices of the Supreme Court.

This clause is one example of the system of checks and balances inherent in the Constitution.

The president has the plenary power to nominate, while the Senate possesses the plenary power to reject or confirm the nominee.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appoint ... Nomination

Is there a 100 year precedent to not even meet with a nominee or allow him/her a hearing?

McConnell should have allowed Garland to have a hearing, and put him up for a vote.

Then his party could have voted against his confirmation if they wanted to.

But Garland didn't even get a **** meeting with any Republicans.

Termin8tor » 14 Feb 2020 4:25 pm » wrote:

Misty » 14 Feb 2020 4:19 pm » wrote:Yet you didn't even attempt to counter my claim.
Go figure.

Yes I did, and you censored it.

Liar.

Rick Wilson has such a way with words.







Roger Stone Knows Trump’s Secrets. That’s Why He’ll Avoid Prison - By Rick Wilson

It’s not every day that a degenerate former swinger and serial scumbag who built a career based on a single line of **** and self-fellation so constant and vigorous that it is practically a yogic art form stands before the bar of justice, but here we are.

Roger Stone is, as he loves to be, in the center of a national political scandal, and with his sentencing approaching in just days, Stone hoped the Trump “Justice” Department would save him from a well-deserved sentence of seven to nine years in prison.

Stone earned the recommended sentence not because he is a Trump ally, but because he threatened witnesses, lied to the court and to the House of Representatives, and got caught.

Worst of all, he threatened Judge Amy Berman-Jackson online, defied various gag orders, and engaged in his usual rat-****.

He made the mistake of thinking that Judge Berman-Jackson is as gullible as the claque of hangers-on, wanna-be catamites, and scumbag errand boys with whom Stone usually surrounds himself.

The Trump media has been bleating for two days now that the original sentence recommended by the career Justice Department officials that Stone serve his twilight years breaking rocks, stamping out license plates, and working in a prison call center was a massive miscarriage of justice, a horror beyond words and reason, and a grim penalty for a wee, decrepit old dandy barely able to totter to the stand in his own defense.

****. The sentence Stone faced was appropriate because his actions weren’t simply a criminal — and criminally stupid — defense of the president.

They were just one part of a wider assault from the transparently corrupt Trump-Barr kleptocracy on the entire administration of justice in the United States.

William Barr, who has taken on the role of Trump’s family attorney, put his greasy thumb on the scale this week, demanding the U.S. attorneys in the case reduce Stone’s recommended sentence.

It led to the withdrawal of all four of the prosecutors, and the resignation of one.

Barr’s bull-in-a-china-shop efforts on Stone’s behalf were comically absurd, driven by a Trump tweet, and will no doubt land him in front of congressional committees for a full political rectal exam in the immediate future.

But they were also par for the course in his role as the chief enabler and defender of this president.

Barr has been systematically choking out every investigation of the Trump administration since he killed off Bob Mueller, and has no intention of stopping.

Like Trump, Barr is unbound, uncontrolled, and has no fear of congressional power.

He doesn’t care about the scummy appearance of his actions; it’s a feature of Trumpism that anyone engaging in any action defending this president will be praised for it on the presidential Twitter feed and on the Presidential News Channel.

The shamelessness is a feature, not a bug.

As Trump seeks to settle scores, terrify future witnesses, and generally act out all the fantasies in his authoritarian spank bank, Barr is his chief fluffer.

Trump’s fantasy of having another Roy Cohn has come to life, with all of Cohn’s mendacity and amorality, but in a size 54 stout from Men’s Wearhouse.

Stone deserved everything in the first sentencing memo. Every minute.

He deserves to be dragged from the courtroom in shackles and issued his itchy, federal-prison poly-cotton orange scrubs.

Karmically, he deserves it because he was one of Trump’s lifelong enablers, and because once Trump was elected, Stone trafficked in the most lunatic and corrosive conspiracy theories under the sun.

Stone’s gift for sleaze-bag political tactics was always that — tactical.

He was great at piling on a wounded victim (see Elliot Spitzer), but it was Trump who kept Stone afloat for decades.

Of course, Stone likely won’t serve his full hitch, because Trump and Barr know that without a pardon Stone will squeal like a rat in a blender, proving that Trump lied to Mueller and about the details of the Trump-Stone-WikiLeaks connections.

Stone sure as hell deserves his time in the graybar hotel for reasons of both ordinary and moral justice, and Judge Berman-Jackson has also likely had enough of Stone’s weapons-grade **** and may treat the revised DOJ sentencing letter as the political trash it is.

In some ways there’s a terrible and largely unremarked symmetry to the role Barr has played as Trump’s Roy Cohn.

In the early days of his career, Stone was a bagman and dogsbody for the infamous Cohn, who served as an early Trump attorney and fixer in New York.

Cohn, one of the most repellent and degenerate stains on America’s political landscape, was a perfect role model for both Trump and Stone.

In the late 1990s, I once asked the famous (or infamous, depending on your perspective) New York political operator Ray Harding about Stone.

Harding was a man who knew where all the bodies — literal and metaphorical — were buried.

He looked across his desk from behind a cloud of unfiltered-Camel smoke and said to me, “Roger parlayed one line of **** into a career.

The only person who buys his **** is that moron Trump.”

At least some justice has come for Fort Lauderdale’s most prominent Penguin cosplayer and sleaze-ball boulevardier already.

Trump left his former confidant hanging for two years, reducing Stone to penury in a one-bedroom apartment.

Even if Trump pardons him, Stone will never work in politics again at any serious level — not that he did anyway.

He’ll never get out from under his legal bills.

His speaking circuit appearances at local Republican clubs in Florida often bring in tens of dollars, and it’s gonna take longer than Stone has on this Earth to catch up.

His days as a provocateur are over.

He may get a hit or two on Infowars or OANN, but he’ll never be in the big green rooms again.

His days without having the mark of “felon” — pardoned or not — branding him are over.

For Stone, one of the tragedies is that the world of campaigning has moved on from dumb, dirty tricksters like him; Trump will likely never allow him back into even his outer circle because Stone brings nothing of value to a modern campaign.

He will never sit at the high table of the Orange King with his old status.

Even a man of Stone’s unlimited chutzpah will never be able to wink and nod his way to convincing any but the most slack-jawed Trump fans he still has the confidence of the president.

The attention he craves will, on its best days, come as a form of pity.

Stone’s last whisper of power and influence is gone, and no matter what happens next week, he’s going to bear the lifelong stain of a man who spent time in prison for crimes he gleefully committed.

Long sentence or short, everything Trump touches dies — even his most loyal henchman.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... ssion=true

Termin8tor » 15 Feb 2020 8:09 am » wrote:

You are a PROVEN LIAR a GUTLESS COWARD and a TRAITOR. All you did here was REPEAT the same STUPID LIES I have already DEBUNKED at least a dozen times as for GATEWAY it is a JOKE impossible to SMEAR it is so risible and Hoft is known as the STUPIDEST man on the internet so STUPID he got PHOTOGRAPHED flashing a white power sign

You dishonestly smear Gateway as absolutely unreliable.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-gateway-pundit/Home » The Gateway PunditThe Gateway PunditShare:FacebookTwitterPinterestEmailTumblrRedditLinkedInFlipboardGoogle BookmarksShare
793QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
Overall, we rate The Gateway Pundit Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracies and numerous instances of publishing false (fake) news.Detailed Report

Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Nationalism, Some Fake News

EXTREME RIGHT, NATIONALISM, CONSPIRACY THEORIES FAKE NEWS, this is the site you use not because it is CREDIBLE but because it tells the LIES you want to spew. You HATE reality HATE FACTS and HATE reality which is why you RUN AWAY from the FACTS EVERY DAY like the GUTLESS COWARD you are. Gateway Pundit is not SMEARED as unreliable they ARE UNRELIABLE that is plain FACT. They are however a RELIABLE source for LIES