world

Trump's lawyers want him to refuse Mueller interview request: New York Times

135 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2018.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

135 Comments
Login to comment

What's Trump hiding? Why won't he release his full tax info?

You'd think if he was clean, it would be no problem testifying under oath.

What are his lawyers afraid of? Maybe they know they can't intimidate and bully this time like they'd done for Trump all those decades.

20 ( +21 / -1 )

Of COURSE he'll refuse it, despite promising and saying he looks forward to it. The man is an absolute coward.

17 ( +17 / -0 )

nothing to hide, say all the people who are against transparency for anything else.

the newspaper said the lawyers were concerned that given Trump's penchant for making false statements and contradicting himself, he could be charged with lying to investigators.

Yeah, Im really sure Trump's own lawyers told this to people.

-19 ( +0 / -19 )

The guy is 71. Easy to get confused at that age.

I read in another story here that some folk would forsake the good of America just to prove Trump wrong. (paraphrasing)

I think that is the problem in a nutshell.

-18 ( +0 / -18 )

The mistake pundits make about analyzing what Trump will or will not do is that they work from a basis of rational thought and action, which is not the case with Trump. He may decide to fire Mueller because his Big Mac is cold and french fries are soggy.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

we havent even been told yet what crime Mueller is even investigating, much less any proof.

This is just written to start another round of the media screeching "He is going to fire Muller", "Constitutuional Crisis!"

Dems and the media got their butts kicked on SOTU speech, the Schumer Shutdown and the memo, so time for them to start up the last resort Russia nonsense again.

-22 ( +0 / -22 )

Yeah, when Trump said he could testify under oath we all kind of laughed. His fans fell for it, tho.

20 ( +20 / -0 )

The Russian investigation isn't the last resort. You mustn't rush these things.

He may sit down, he may wander around Mueller in a menacing fashion. Who knows?

Truth will out, eventually.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

we havent even been told yet what crime Mueller is even investigating, much less any proof.

Yeah it's not like he has found anyone who has admitted guilt so far.

...oh wait, yes he has.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Got evidence right in front of your eyes from the Senate Judiciary Committee that says a contact in Russia gave information to a "Clinton friend" who sent information to a redacted contact at the Obama DOJ who then fed it to Steele to put in his dossier. Steele never even traveled to Russia per his testimony, remember?

But sure, lets speculate about Trump firing Mueller some more. Gotta keep looking for that elusive collusion that is actually right under our noses, hiding under a different candidate's name.

-22 ( +0 / -22 )

Admitted guilt of what? Personal lying to the FBI. In Flynn's case possibly under financial duress or threats to his family. So what is the CRIME which Trump is being accused of that means he must address this with Muller. Anyone?

-20 ( +0 / -20 )

He recently reiterated his promise to testify under oath, so being a man of his word, that is surely what he will do. Glad we have that sorted.

Interesting how the purveyors of smokescreens get more active when they sense danger approaching!

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Trump's lawyers want him to refuse Mueller interview request

Of course! If Trump tells the truth, he's in trouble. If he lies, he's in trouble. Trump said he'd love to sit down with Mueller, so we should hold his feet to the fire.

Bill Clinton being questioned about whether he had sex or not with that woman is small potatoes compared to secret meetings inside of Trump Tower between the president's son and Russian agents regarding dirt on a political opponent.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

I like presidents who aren't under FBI special counsel criminal investigations......

Haven't seen so much twisting in the wind since grandma left her laundry hanging on the line during a tornado.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Of course Trump's lawyers don't want him speaking with Mueller, unlike their client, the lawyers aren't absolute idiots. The lawyers know Trump is incapable of concise answers or recognizing when he is the least smartest person in the room, which is almost always.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

I see. So its common practice to investigate people for over 1.5 years to see if there is possibly anything criminal they have done? So we have no idea what Mueller is even investigating as related to Russia.

What caused the FBI to have this idea that Trump was doing illegal things with Russia again? It was the dossier, has that changed to something else? A drunk guy in a bar? a foreign agent who hasnt been charged at all after months of wiretapping?

Speaking of dossier, Steele didnt show up for his court date in the UK. Too many times his testimony there and what he told the FBI hasnt matched, I guess.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

"Sir, you must refuse the interview, or else you will end up in prison for a VERY LONG time."

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Yes, Watergate had a crime involved. No one will answer my question about what crime is involved here.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

So its common practice to investigate people for over 1.5 years to see if there is possibly anything criminal they have done?

It’s basically high rent racial profiling, and we know how the alt-right love it when the cops do that. Well, that’s what they are doing here; when a massive scam has been committed, you look for the fat rich white guy. It’s just sensible police work eh? As the alt-right also say, ‘innocent people don’t run’.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

What caused the FBI to have this idea that Trump was doing illegal things with Russia again?

Again? How many times do you need to be reminded?

Popodopolous' loose lips started the investigation into Trump collusion in early 2016.

Trump's loose lips and stupidity started the investigation into obstruction in nearly 2017.

"I'm looking forward to it, actually," Trump told reporters last month.

Another Trump lie.

Trump either voluntarily does an interview or Mueller forces him to testify before a grand jury.

Either way, he is toast.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Who knew proven scammer and known liar Donald Trump would be just what America needed to be great again?

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Ah so now it’s Papadopoulos. What’s the crime? All that guy talked about was someone having some of Hillary’s emails.

Oh and obstruction is still firing Comey a year ago? Still hoping on that one, ok.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

I mean seriously, why fault the Trump skeptics? If someone told you the man who would stand up for American workers would be the one who imports foreign workers at his resorts...can you really blame us for being skeptical? Who knew that he guy who outsources manufacturing to China would be the one who fights for American manufacturing, and continues to do so?

Its counter-intuitive to say the least, so why criticize us for not believing him right off the bat? Give us some time. We need to get comfortable with the idea with the guy with a son who sells out America would be fighting for Americans.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

I see. So its common practice to investigate people for over 1.5 years to see if there is possibly anything criminal they have done?

Yes, it's not unusual in the slightest. It could last even longer.

So we have no idea what Mueller is even investigating as related to Russia.

Should he make it public, so the guilty parties won't be left in the dark?

What caused the FBI to have this idea that Trump was doing illegal things with Russia again?

Trump's well-known pre-White House business dealings with Russia? The close ties with Russia that more than one of his top (now disgraced) aids had? Proof that Russia interfered with US elections? Trump's inability to criticize Putin? Have you been paying attention?

No one will answer my question about what crime is involved here.

Maybe collusion, maybe obstruction of justice, maybe just money laundering, maybe nothing.

A better question is, why are you so against an investigation to find out?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

What caused the FBI to have this idea that Trump was doing illegal things with Russia again?

You don't suppose it's because so many people on his team met with the Russians, and then lied about it do you?

It couldn't be that, could it?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Yes, Watergate had a crime involved. No one will answer my question about what crime is involved here.

The FBI isn't letting you in on the inner details of an ongoing investigation?! How dare they! Telling dudes on the internet exactly what is happening is obviuosly much more important than ensuring a proper investigation.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

the fact that I said TRUMP, not "members of his team" might have something to do with that.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Which of these is the "crime" which Trump did? Any "illegal" business dealings? nope! Responsible for his aid? nope! Helped to interfere in the election? nope! crime to not criticize Putin? nope Have I been paying attention? yep!

Trump's well-known pre-White House business dealings with Russia? The close ties with Russia that more than one of his top (now disgraced) aids had? Proof that Russia interfered with US elections? Trump's inability to criticize Putin? Have you been paying attention?

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Oh and obstruction is still firing Comey a year ago? Still hoping on that one, ok.

Um, you do realize it's an ongoing investigation, right?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

"the New York Times reported on Monday.

Citing four people briefed on the matter, the newspaper said the lawyers were concerned that given Trump's penchant for making false statements and contradicting himself,"

So says the New York Times, lol

Oh my...

Steyn: Dems are the ones assaulting the rule of law

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhCeGcy6qDs

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Which of these is the "crime" which Trump did?

Um, none... I don't think you understand the concept of an "investigation." An investigation will determine whether those things are linked to a "crime."

Have I been paying attention? yep!

Well you skipped the part where I mentioned possible crimes he might be guilty of, like collusion (i.e., actual treason), obstruction of justice, and money laundering. He might even be innocent, but again, an investigation needs to play out to determine that.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

What's Trump hiding? Why won't he release his full tax info? 

Are we still on that? While you guys are at it, let’s see if we can dig up Al Capone’s vault.

You'd think if he was clean, it would be no problem testifying under oath. 

Why? And fall into a perjury trap? He doesn’t need to and shouldn’t and especially knowing how corrupt the FBI is and the farce of this investigation, I wouldn’t talk at all. I’d tell Mueller to ***** and I'll have my lawyers talk to him and give me any questions and would respond in writing.

What are his lawyers afraid of? Maybe they know they can't intimidate and bully this time like they'd done for Trump all those decades.

Its not about being afraid, it’s about NOT falling into a trap that Mueller and the Dems want.

Which of these is the "crime" which Trump did? Any "illegal" business dealings? nope! Responsible for his aid? nope! Helped to interfere in the election? nope! crime to not criticize Putin? nope Have I been paying attention? yep

Exactly.

They also never asked Hillary to testify, oh, they exonerated her before that. I keep forgetting that.

-17 ( +0 / -17 )

Serious orchestrated squealing here from Trump's Republican Guard. We must be on to something!

7 ( +7 / -0 )

@bas4 Why? And fall into a perjury trap? 

Are you saying he's going to lie? If so, I can understand you're doing so. He has never had even the slightest bit of credibility. Except, of course to his devotees.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

When your army of lawyers advise don't talk, it's time to admit your guilty and silence is the only option.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

So I guess you guys can’t imagine any instance when the FBI says someone lied but they didn’t. Like if their family is threatened with false prosecution or they have run out of money for lawyers.

Ok enjoy that world, I don’t believe such a place exists.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Oh and obstruction is still firing Comey a year ago? Still hoping on that one, ok.

Hope and Fear are driving comments like yours. Hope there isn't obstruction, and fear that there is obstruction.

Obstruction is becoming more of a reality with Mueller wanting to interview Trump about dictating lies for Dummy Jr.'s meeting with the "Russian lawyer" and Hope Hicks saying that no one will ever get Dummy Jr's emails that said the meeting was about getting dirt on Clinton from Russia, shortly before Dummy Jr. released them to the public.

A person in that meeting with Trump and Hicks has already testified before Mueller, and it doesn't look good for Trump.

Fact: Obstruction of justice is one of the three specific items on Rosensteins missive to Mueller. Number 1 was Trump campaign collusion with Russia, and number 3 was anything else under the sun discovered during Mueller's investigation, which would include any financial crimes committed by Trump, Flynn, Manafort, etc. from anytime before or after the election. Bulldog Mueller has hired financial crimes experts. I expect a boat load of charges coming to the lying president and many more soon.

Yes, Trump's attorneys are worried about a perjury trap. He either admits to a crime or lies about it. Either answer (Yes or No) breaks the law. Which means, Trump committed a crime, which is a requirement for a perjury trap to work.

So, if you say you are worried about a perjury trap, then you are worried that he has committed a crime and may lie about.

The real question is, will the GoP side with a criminal and Russia, or will the GoP side with the American people. At this point, the answer seems like the GoP will side with a criminal and Russia.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

"What we're seeing here is the willingness of Donald Trump to provoke a constitutional crisis to keep from having to reveal the real facts that Mueller is uncovering in this investigation. He does not want this to go forward and one way is to not testify and that indeed could provoke this constitutional crisis. Trump does not want a report on whether or not there was collusion, whether or not there was an obstruction of justice, whether or not, indeed, the president of the United States has sought to cover-up and undermine all of this investigation which he has from beginning to end. He doesn't want that report made and he's willing from everything we know from those who talk to him regularly, he's willing to provoke a constitutional crisis and at that point, perhaps, Republicans might finally have to say, 'You know, we may have to leave this president's side. We need to find out what happened with the Russians.'"

Carl Bernstein, CNN 2/6/2018

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Carl Bernstein, CNN 2/6/2018

I'm sitting back and waiting for the Republicans to brand Bernstein as an un-american traitor.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

So I guess you guys can’t imagine any instance when the FBI says someone lied but they didn’t. Like if their family is threatened with false prosecution or they have run out of money for lawyers.

Ahh, can I "imagine" a scenario where maybe the FBI lied? Possibly, but imaginery scenarios are irrelevant. Especially, when there have been dozens of times where Donny lied.

If you ask me to pick between Trump and the FBI, the FBI wins everytime.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

More like a perjury trap like:

did you speak with person A.

No I didn’t.

An anonymous source saw you open the door and greet that person.

That’s “our” definition of speak so you lied.

thats also why they didn’t put Hillary under oath nor keep any notes.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

The FISA application never mentions that Steele was ultimately working on behalf of-and paid by-the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.

Is that not lying on the FISA application to be the judge?

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

More like a perjury trap like:

That's not quite how perjury works.

And besides Donny is, like, really smart. He's got, like, the best brains. What's there to worry about?;)

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Nunes began by repeating the same logically bankrupt line of reasoning he's been pushing for weeks: "The Democrats and the Hillary campaign paid for dirt," he urged, "that the FBI then used to get a warrant on an American citizen to spy on another campaign." It is an argument that ignores, among many other things too numerous to list here, that the Russia investigation was already under way when the Bureau sought a FISA warrant on Trump campaign official Carter Page; that FISA judges have authorized the renewal of the Page warrant three separate times since; and that the FBI **disclosed to the FISA judge that some of its information came from a politically motivated source**.

Where in the memo is there evidence the FBI lied to get the FISA warrant?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

If Trump said those words it would be a lie, sure. FBI or Dems it just not sharing all the information they had, which is perfectly ok. They don’t think “paid for by Hillary” would matter at all.

I heard Mike Flynn told the FBI he didn’t talk about sanctions with Russia. They recorded him telling Russia that they aren’t going to talk about sanctions now but they will talk later.

so telling someone you aren’t going to talk about something is now.....talking about it?because you mentioned not talking about it? That’s why Comey initially announced Flynn didn’t lie.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Trump does not distinguish between fact and fiction, has the memory of a gnat and zero negotiating skills. He would be a nightmare witness as his lawyers are well aware. No wonder they will do whatever they can to keep him from wrapping that rope around his own neck.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The FISA application never mentions that Steele was ultimately working on behalf of-and paid by-the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information. 

Is that not lying on the FISA application to be the judge?

No, it is not lying. Lying would have been saying, "The FBI never paid Steele." See the difference?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Especially, when there have been dozens of times where Donny lied.

You are generous and kind.

Or are you just measuring by the minute?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

So excluding facts isn’t lying in liberal world, gotta annotate that one for future reference.

Well it’s gonna get worse cause now proof not only dossier paid for by Hillary but she fed the content through several Russian intermediaries and DOJ to Steele to so he could write it.

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

The FISA application never mentions that Steele was ultimately working on behalf of-and paid by-the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information. 

Is that not lying on the FISA application to be the judge?

Lying would have been saying a meeting was about Russian adoption and the Minsky act when it was about dirt on Clinton from Russia.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The real memo is going to be released now, so we can all stop worrying about the Nunes red herring. Or Trump will decide to block its release, revealing his fear of the truth. Either way there are no longer any grounds for pretending to believe Nunes or anything he wrote.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Well it’s gonna get worse cause now proof not only dossier paid for by Hillary but she fed the content through several Russian intermediaries and DOJ to Steele to so he could write it.

Totally. Forget last time. Or the time before. Or the time before that. This time we've got her. ;)

Ever notice how these stories drop in conservative media right after bad news breaks for Trump? Coincidence, I'm sure. ;)

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Lying would have been saying a meeting was about Russian adoption and the Minsky act when it was about dirt on Clinton from Russia

Or saying you have no connections with Russia, but conveniently leaving out your business trying (and failing) to develop property in Russia.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

No, it is not lying. 

Yes, it is.

Lying would have been saying, "The FBI never paid Steele." See the difference?

They paid for a dossier that was fabricated to obtain a warrant to unseat a President, that's Watergate on steroids.

That's not quite how perjury works. 

That's exactly how it works. The best thing for Trump to do is just NOT deal with Mueller and if so, write it out. It's his legal right to do so and if the left don't like it or scarf at it, oh, well, life will go on even for liberals.

And besides Donny is, like, really smart. He's got, like, the best brains. What's there to worry about?;)

He beat 17 Republicans, cleaned Hillary's clock, saved the economy, from the last disaster, cut all the disastrous regulations, got rid of political correctness, appointed more judicial conservative judges by half a dozen since the 50's, so yeah, I would call that really, really, really smart. Gen-i-us!

Ever notice how these stories drop in conservative media right after bad news breaks for Trump? Coincidence, I'm sure. ;)

I don't know what you are talking about, but I'm hearing it non-stop, but on the liberal side, the deforestation of trees is becoming an environmental danger as the left cry up another daily storm of gloom and doom.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

Ok that’s enough for me on this topic. I simply want liberals to consider that if you don’t identify wrongdoing now due to partisanship or Trump hate, you can’t complain later. If it’s not wrong now, then anyone can do it later.

trump will have his people in FBI and DOJ leadership by 2020. He will have the Supreme Court and all these activist judges will be negated by Trump appointees.

Trump appointees will mysteriously get all the important cases. Withholding info from FISA court and unproven dossiers from foreign sources all ok. Let’s start making one on top 20 Dems right now.

Can spy on political opponents all you want, just say someone heard someone say something in a bar if questioned why you spying. FBI agents who hate Trump’s opponent can be trusted not to be biased as they investigate that candidate.

Repubs should never lose an election ever again. Do you really want to say all this behavior is perfectly fine?

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

"Treasonous" Trump and his hapless GOP enablers are already twisting in the wind even before Mueller's Last Judgment begins. Then come the midterms which will make a lame turkey out of the Trumpster. Thereafter his goose will be cooked and he'll be dead man tweeting as the Dems prepare articles of impeachment. Can't wait to see the last act of this farce as the ex-POTUS does the perp-waddle from the White House to the penitentiary. Well, we are free to dream and sometimes dreams do come true.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

They paid for a dossier that was fabricated to obtain a warrant to unseat a President, that's Watergate on steroids.

Not fabricated. And the investigation began before the dossier.

, I would call that really, really, really smart. Gen-i-us!

But not smart enough to sit for an interview with investigatora without his counsel worrying he'd lie or contradict himself. Gen-i-us! ;)

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Repubs should never lose an election ever again. Do you really want to say all this behavior is perfectly fine?

So you're saying we have to let Trump ignore the balance of power to prevent Trump from creating a situation where he can ignore the balance of power? Mind blown...

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Not fabricated. And the investigation began before the dossier.

I'm talking about the FISA warrant.

But not smart enough to sit for an interview with investigatora without his counsel worrying he'd lie or contradict himself. Gen-i-us! ;)

That's like saying, you have a loaded gun, hand it to me and ask me to cock the trigger and I say, "sure."

One thing that I always learned from my dad is, follow the advice of your lawyer and if you have more and they all agree on the same thing, follow their advice. Trump should show Mueller the bird and walk away. Now that's smart.

So you're saying we have to let Trump ignore the balance of power to prevent Trump from creating a situation where he can ignore the balance of power? Mind blown.

The Dems have been doing that for a very, very long time, so now why all the sudden outrage? Oh, my....

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Nope. Identify abuse of power now so that future people, including Trump and his successors, will be unable to abuse the rights of citizens. If it’s legal and fine to be done to Trump, it’s also legal and fine if anyone else (including Trump) does it.

that might be mind blowing for a liberal but to me it’s jusy normal. If it’s legal when you do it, it’s legal when I do the sam. I know all these Clintons getting away with stuff got you messed up but that’s still true.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

I love how now the investigation has nothing to do with the dossier once we found out where it came from and who paid.

Go back to your own posts or do a Google search from 6 months ago and see that the dossier was the “proof” for this all. I’m outta here, enjoy.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Cherniy Yarlyk,

Nobody knows what you're talking about.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Well it’s gonna get worse cause now proof not only dossier paid for by Hillary

Someone seems to be trying hard to not mention that the dossier was started by the Republican party...

Hmm, seems that someone was just whining about Democrats leaving out facts...

No hypocrisy here. Carry on.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Someone seems to be trying hard to not mention that the dossier was started by the Republican party...

And then taken over bought and paid for by the Hillary and DNP NONE of that is forgotten.

Hmm, seems that someone was just whining about Democrats leaving out facts...

Never, they are the party of laughs/

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

Oops, that should have been RNC.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

maybeperhapsyes: "The guy is 71. Easy to get confused at that age."

Then he should not be president. Plain and simple.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

I think that is really good advice.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

bass4funk: "And then taken over bought and paid for by the Hillary and DNP NONE of that is forgotten."

Started and paid for by the Republican party, bud. You guys simply cannot get over that fact and like to use the time-machine argument that it was the other way around. You can't.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

They paid for a dossier that was fabricated to obtain a warrant to unseat a President, that's Watergate on steroids.

Not quite, Tiger. The dossier was not created to be used to get a warrant to unseat a president. Let me walk you through it:

The DNC/Campaign paid for a dossier for information on trump.

That dossier was used as partial evidence to obtain a FISA warrant, with the FISC knowing the dossier was politically motivated, in

an ongoing investigation that

may result in the unseating of a president

because of his own actions.

You'll get it next time, Sport.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Clearly Trump testimony under oath would be a defense lawyer's worst nightmare. Trump apparently truly believes the claptrap of events he's constructed in his head correspond to reality; as such, there is really no way to fence him in to the reservation of reality.

On the other hand, if his lawyers prevent him from testifying voluntarily, Mueller could then subpoena him. The chance the courts would indemnify Trump in this case are slim, particularly if Mueller concentrates on events which occurred before Trump's selection by the electoral college. But at least it would then not be a fault of a Trump lawyer.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I love how now the investigation has nothing to do with the dossier once we found out where it came from and who paid.

More spin based on a presumption that the dossier was fabricated.

No, the investigation began with Papadopolous. The dossier raised a lot of concerns that would have been investigated, and I am certain were part of the investigation into Trump collusion.

Obviously, the dossier isn't the total collusion investigation.

What makes this all worse than Watergate is that Watergate was wholly domestic.

Trumpgate is dealing with collusion with Russian spies, and the GoP is taking it like a champ.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

On the other hand, if his lawyers prevent him from testifying voluntarily, Mueller could then su

Just a point of clarification. It is unethical for a lawyer to prevent a client from testifying. A lawyer can strongly advise against doing so, but the ultimate decision belongs to the client.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

He beat 17 Republicans...

17 mediocre Republicans.

...cleaned Hillary's clock...

On a technicality.

...saved the economy, from the last disaster...

In denial about the latest stock market news?

...cut all the disastrous regulations, got rid of political correctness...

Not exactly up there with freeing the slaves or winning WW2, is it.

appointed more judicial conservative judges by half a dozen since the 50's,

With a GOP controlled Congress to make it really easy.

...so yeah, I would call that really, really, really smart. Gen-i-us!

You write stuff like "judicial conservative judge." Your views on who is or is not smart do not carry much weight.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Not quite, Tiger. The dossier was not created to be used to get a warrant to unseat a president.

Ok, it was used to find dirt or a reason to unseat the President.

Let me cut through the mustard. I am trying to stay awake.

Started and paid for by the Republican party, bud.

Started, but morphed and was heavily expanded under the DNP and the Hillary camp and pawned off as originally opposition research.

You guys simply cannot get over that fact and like to use the time-machine argument that it was the other way around. You can't.

We can, but the problem is, the left never ever want to take responsibility for anything unless it fits their narrative or fits within their mantra and political agenda.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Ok, it was used to find dirt or a reason to unseat the President.

Let me cut through the mustard. I am trying to stay awake.

Who cares about how it is used?

Trump can't be unseated, unless he committed high crimes and the GoP is not in allegiance with Russia.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Just a point of clarification. It is unethical for a lawyer to prevent a client from testifying. A lawyer can strongly advise against doing so, but the ultimate decision belongs to the client.

Good point, Tommy, and sloppy writing on my part. In reality, one wonders how much daylight exists between "strongly advise against" and "prevent," though - that is, to what extent Trump is in command of his facilities and the decisions that arise thereupon and to what are necessarily outsourced.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"What's Trump hiding? Why won't he release his full tax info? 

"Are we still on that? While you guys are at it, let’s see if we can dig up Al Capone’s vault.

Har! I prefer to say that's about as worn out as a pack of cards in a penitentiary.

Oh my...

Denzel Washington: Trump’s Election Saved Us From ‘Orwellian Police State’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDrBaZmrAPs

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Are we still on that?

Why wouldn't we be? It's not like he has given a plausible explanation as to why he won't show it, nor has he shown himself to be a trustworthy person for whom we could ignore it.

It's like if someone was murdered, and a few years later you were questioning if we were still 'on that' since we still hadn't found the murderer.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Denzel Washington: Trump’s Election Saved Us From ‘Orwellian Police State’

Serrano, when will you and the Repubs kick the Hillary Reflux Syndrome? She is gone. She will never run for any influential office again, and likely nor will her offspring, at least for several generations. As far as a political entity, she is now kaput. Zero. An entity with about as much influence as I.

But Washington's purported "Orwellian police state" - do you find nothing ironic in that as it happens before your eyes? Trump is doing his darndest to politicize intelligence agencies. Now, you, as I do, might think that these agencies already have too much power - but directing that excessive power against political opponents, as Trump is clearly doing now, is a step far too far.

Don't sit on your laurels. Pay attention to what threatens American democracy now.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Who cares about how it is used?

Certainly liberals don’t and would never expect them to.

Trump can't be unseated, unless he committed high crimes and the GoP is not in allegiance with Russia.

pheeeeew.

Trump's lawyers worried he'll get caught out lying to Mueller so don't want him to testify.

Not necessarily, but what he could do is just ask him anything where he thinks he could chapter and just that possibility alone is a danger to try to use any ploy to ask him a question in order to get an answer where he can see, I gotcha. This is what the FBI does. Oldest trick in the book.

Why wouldn't we be? It's not like he has given a plausible explanation as to why he won't show it, nor has he shown himself to be a trustworthy person for whom we could ignore it.

Ok, let the man waste his time, whatever. Lol

It's like if someone was murdered, and a few years later you were questioning if we were still 'on that' since we still hadn't found the murderer.

Yeah, but No one got murdered. Mueller is not looking for a killer, he’s looking for something or anything to get a noose around the President.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Ok, it was used to find dirt or a reason to unseat the President.

It was used to investigate the president because his actions created doubts as to whether there was dirt to be concerned about.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Mueller may not be looking for a killer but the fake PotUS has some incredibly dodgy connections. The mafia stuff will surface again, pretty sure about that. An added bonus to resume of one of the most corrupt and nefarious Presidents ever in office.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It was used to investigate the president because his actions created doubts as to whether there was dirt to be concerned about.

Ok, so then let’s say Kamala Harris wants to throw her hat in and run in 2020 if the Trump campaign used the exact same techniques the Hillary camp and DNC used, then it should be ok, given the fact that you claim it’s all legal and within reason, should be ok.

Mueller may not be looking for a killer but the fake PotUS has some incredibly dodgy connections.

Fake.....ohhhh, very much real. Lol

The mafia stuff will surface again, pretty sure about that.

What? ROFL. First the left looked stupid and now they just look painfully and historically pathetic. Why you Brits worry so much cracks me up. I could care less what happens over there.

An added bonus to resume of one of the most corrupt and nefarious Presidents ever in office.

Nothing can beat the corruption of the last President and his sidekick candidate. Smooth as silk and slimy as a snake.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Ok, so then let’s say Kamala Harris wants to throw her hat in and run in 2020 if the Trump campaign used the exact same techniques the Hillary camp and DNC used, then it should be ok, given the fact that you claim it’s all legal and within reason, should be ok

Trump did try to use the same tactics, except his son and son-in-law and a few others actually met with Russian.

Nothing can beat the corruption of the last President and his sidekick candidate. Smooth as silk and slimy as a snake.

Obama wasn't corrupt. Had he been, you conservative's would have been overly vocal and attempted to investigate him numerous times. Conservatives even investigated Obama's birth. Him being corrupt is just another weird ideas conservatives keep in the vast emptiness between their ears.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Do you have anything substantive to add explanation to these utterly vacuous one-liners?

Certainly liberals don’t and would never expect them to.

pheeeeew.

Ok, let the man waste his time, whatever. Lol

And as for this heavy statement:

Mueller is not looking for a killer, he’s looking for something or anything to get a noose around the President.

Mueller has nothing in his past to suggest he is a partisan activist operating beyond the ethical and legal parameters of his job. He has over many decades been respected by both conservatives and liberals as a consummate professional who gets the job done properly. A decorated Vietnam marine. A Republican who was the second longest serving head of the FBI, transforming the FBI in essential ways after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, particularly in terms of technological innovation. Across both GOP and Democratic administrations. Read up on his background, and Comey's and Rosenstein's while you're at it. Then you can come back and say with a straight face that Mueller is simply out to get a noose around Trump. Any idea of how hard that would be to pull off outside of a movie?

You're going after Mueller rather than admit what you and everybody else knows about Trump. You know, the president who built his TV fame out of being a rich "man" who plays fast and loose with the law, business ethics, and common respect for other humans. The president who gloats about treating women like commodities for his pleasure. The president whose lies and misleading comments are quickly tossed out by his adoring fans who have convinced themselves that Trump's boorish personality is something admirable.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

Plastic: Spot on.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bannon doesn't want to do the right thing, either

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/06/trump-russia-steve-bannon-refuses-to-testify-before-house-committee-source

Murky stuff.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Citing four people briefed on the matter, the newspaper said the lawyers were concerned that given Trump's penchant for making false statements and contradicting himself, he could be charged with lying to investigators.

The above from trumps own lawyers/handlers CLEARLY demonstrates he is utterly UNFIT for office & needs to step down or be forced to do so.

His own lawyers have spoken trump is incompetent & clearly should NEVER be exposed to anything classified or related to national security, he is totally untrustworthy according to his own lawyers

CASE CLOSED on this goofball, enough already!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

To say Trump is advised not to give an interview because of his habit of lying is simply ridiculous. If he is innocent, then all he has to do is tell the truth. It's too easy for a 3rd grader.

You've made two logical errors: first, that Trump considers his penchant for lying ridiculous (it's how he built his business and thus part of his conceptual DNA), and second, that the truth would set him free. It likely would not, even if he were able to distinguish it. Herein lies the quandary: How can a man unable to separate fact from fiction testify honestly about events he's simply constructed in his mind?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

To say Trump is advised not to give an interview because of his habit of lying is simply ridiculous. If he is innocent, then all he has to do is tell the truth

I’ve heard compulsive liars can often weave a web so tangled they can often confuse truth and lies.

This, along with his appalling grasp of the English language, his tantrum-throwing and sheer arrogance, should make his lawyers advise him to keep his toilet mouth firmly shut.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

BlacklabelToday 01:45 pm JST

Yes, Watergate had a crime involved. No one will answer my question about what crime is involved here.

Sounds to me like they are investigating the "alleged" collusion between Trump, his team and a hostile foreign power to manipulate an election outcome for the position of the President of the United states of America.

Is that enough of a crime for you?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Perhaps you may remember Trump asking for Russian help to hack emails of Hillary Clinton. Hacking is a crime in most countries. Trump is encouraging a hostile foreign power to hack his competitor during the campaign to the election of President. Hidden in plain sight. There is a collusion link with Russia right there. But he said it in a public rally so maybe he was joking. Encouraging people to break laws is never a joke, its kind of illegal.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Trump's lawyers know exactly how stupid he is but they are paid to defend him, hence the advice!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Obama wasn't corrupt.

Corrupt as well, using Chicago ghetto tactics to take out conservatives donors by using the IRS to audit them, taking them out of the 2011 cycle, the fast and furious scandal and now possibly trying to take out this President, smooth and sleazy. The one advantage that he had over Trump is that his soft demeanor was his cover, but don't give me that crap he wasn't corrupt, he just knew how to play the game better.

Had he been, you conservative's would have been overly vocal and attempted to investigate him numerous times.

Didn't conservatives don't usually moan about these things, we just sit and bite our time. Patience is the ket to victory, less emotion, deep strategy.

Conservatives even investigated Obama's birth.

It was stupid, I was never on board with that, but no Republican hired a special counsel to investigate whether he was born in America or not, which was started by the Hillary camp anyway.

Him being corrupt is just another weird ideas conservatives keep in the vast emptiness between their ears.

If he was corrupt he would have been in cuffs a long time ago. 22 Democratic hit lawyers and still nothing. Let's see what other trickery they have lined up.

He has over many decades been respected by both conservatives and liberals as a consummate professional who gets the job done properly. A decorated Vietnam marine. A Republican who was the second longest serving head of the FBI, transforming the FBI in essential ways after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, particularly in terms of technological innovation.

Plastic, so what's your point, because of having a long and distinguished career, you are immune to being bias or incapable of trying to take down a President? How gullible can a person be?

Across both GOP and Democratic administrations. Read up on his background, and Comey's and Rosenstein's while you're at it. Then you can come back and say with a straight face that Mueller is simply out to get a noose around Trump. Any idea of how hard that would be to pull off outside of a movie?

Very easy actually, especially if you don't have a mandate.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

As long as he gets the same deal Hillary got he should do the interview. That of course would require that the FBI Director write a letter exonerating him three months beforehand.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

The guy is 71. Easy to get confused at that age.

then wtf is he doing being POTUS, he could get confused by some foreign dictators insult and go to war on a whim, A president needs to have all his marbles intact to lead a country with over 5000 nukes under his finger!!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Corrupt as well, using Chicago ghetto tactics to take out conservatives donors by using the IRS to audit them, taking them out of the 2011 cycle, the fast and furious scandal and now possibly trying to take out this President, smooth and sleazy

Obama wasn't responsible for the IRS targeting the Tea Party, it was IRS employees. Nice attempt to spread a falsehood.

Fast and Furious was run by the DOJ, not Obama. Another attempt to spread a falsehood. Unfortunately for you, facts matter.

Didn't conservatives don't usually moan about these things, we just sit and bite our time. Patience is the ket to victory, less emotion, deep strategy.

Sure. Just like you guys aren't screaming at the top of your lungs about the investigations into Trump, NFL players kneeling, non-existent open borders, etc. Conservstives are emotionally driven to the point they are incapable of recognizing facts or speaking normally. They are left with falsehoods and screaming as loudly as possible.

It was stupid, I was never on board with that, but no Republican hired a special counsel to investigate whether he was born in America or not, which was started by the Hillary camp anyway.

There was no special counsel but your boy Donny sure didn't let it go.

It was not started by the Hillary camp. This is another falsehood cons love to shout. Apparently lying is a compulsion with conservatives.

. . .

This:

If he was corrupt he would have been in cuffs a long time ago. 22 Democratic hit lawyers and still nothing. Let's see what other trickery they have lined up.

besides being hyperbolic, is a completely irrelevant response to this:

Him being corrupt is just another weird ideas conservatives keep in the vast emptiness between their ears.

Prociding irrelevant replies seems to be another compulsion. Tsk. Tsk.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As long as he gets the same deal Hillary got he should do the interview.

Weird to see a 'pub looking for a smear campaign and 47 investigations into Trump...

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Look, Trump was incorrect ( again) that the rank and file of the FBI disliked Comey:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/emails-show-fbi-saddened-stunned-021149751.html

Of course, our conservative blowhards will simply claim those agents that expressed sadness at Comey's firing are in on the "Get Trump" conspiracy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

then wtf is he doing being POTUS

Being the troll-in-chief of course. He was elected by trolls who wanted to break the system, by electing a guy who 'tells it like it is' (aka 'trolls').

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Very easy actually, especially if you don't have a mandate

Our omniscient poster thinks it would be easy for a former FBI director to "get" a president as long as the Director doesn't have a mandate! Wow. Just wow.

Good thing Mueller has a very wide ranging mandate. Apparently, that makes it more difficult for him to "get" Trump according to conservative "logic." Yikes.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Stranger: Weird to see a 'pub looking for a smear campaign and 47 investigations into Trump...

Not so weird as seeing a ‘crat defend Hillary’s proven mishandling of state secrets - no wait. Just stick to funding Russian propaganda channeled into the FBI in order to overthrow the lawfully elected president of the United States.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Hillary’s proven mishandling of state secrets

Wow, so the Republicans making something up is now what they hold as the bar for 'proven'.

I guess we don't need courts anymore. Or their inquisitions - they just say the person is guilty even when the inquisition finds otherwise.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Tommy JonesToday  05:08 am JST

Conservstives are emotionally driven to the point they are incapable of recognizing facts or speaking normally. They are left with falsehoods and screaming as loudly as possible.

We shouldn't tar them all with the same brush, that's what the "conservatives" here do when they spout off about liberals. If I were a conservative I would find the Trump bootlickers here deeply embarrassing.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

so what's your point, because of having a long and distinguished career, you are immune to being bias or incapable of trying to take down a President? How gullible can a person be?

No, but there is far more evidence that Mueller has not been biased in his professional conduct than that he has. And there is far more evidence that Trump built his career on dirty tricks, surrounded himself with shady characters like Manafort and Stone during his campaign and transition, and has sought to interfere in an ongoing investigation. That's not being gullible, that's coming to likely conclusions based on available evidence.

You think that Mueller is biased against Trump simply because he's investigating what may have happened based on probable cause. That's what investigators do. If you have some real evidence that Mueller is biased, let's hear it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We shouldn't tar them all with the same brush, that's what the "conservatives" here do when they spout off about liberals. If I were a conservative I would find the Trump bootlickers here deeply embarrassing.

Agreed. Not all conservatives are as ignorant and noisy as many that post.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Plastic: You think that Mueller is biased against Trump simply because he's investigating what may have happened based on probable cause. 

Mueller appears to be biased because he is ignoring the evidence that the Hillary Clinton campaign paid the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election. He is also friends with the person who leaked non-public information to the press, through a cutout, with the intention of getting revenge against the man who fired him from his job. Mueller then hired a team of lawyers who are nearly all Democrat partisans based on publicly available campaign finance information. If the shoe was on the other foot, Dems would be screaming bloody murder. Other than that, Mueller seems like a stand up guy.

Toasted: Agreed. Not all conservatives are as ignorant and noisy as many that post.

It’s also true that not all Leftists that post here are dim witted sycophants - though there are one or two.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Mueller appears to be biased because he is ignoring the evidence that the Hillary Clinton campaign paid the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election.

It's amazing how many people who are inside the investigation and privy to the details are also posters on JT. Are they posters on other sites as well, or do they just happen to accumulate on this site for some reason?

Anyways, since you are in the know insofar as the details of the investigation, what was the reason Mueller has given for ignoring this supposed evidence?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

We shouldn't tar them all with the same brush, that's what the "conservatives" here do when they spout off about liberals. If I were a conservative I would find the Trump bootlickers here deeply embarrassing.

It's true. While I'm very clearly left on most issues, I find the actions of the extreme left to be just as disconcerting as the actions on the extreme right. The right is always going on about how the left does A, or thinks B, where I don't fit into that category of those who do A or thinks B, so all their comments do is alienate me, before I've even looked at the point they are making. We need to not do that to the reasonable republicans (and they do exist - TheFu is one example of this among the posters on this site), as we want them on our side in getting rid of the Troll-in-chief.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The mentally unhinged liberal loons shrieking "Constitutional crisis" at the top of their lungs forget Mueller is an employee of PDJT. They need to be reminded (again) that Mueller serves at pleasure of the President.

I am OK with President Trump meeting with Mueller as long as he walks into the room, sits down, looks at him and says, “You’re fired", gets up and walks out of the room. . . .

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

The barely-literate, extremely ignorant conservatives that think Trump is above the law forget that not even the president is above the law. They need to be reminded (again) that presidents are obliged to adhere to the various laws.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Mueller appears to be biased because he is ignoring the evidence that the Hillary Clinton campaign paid the Russians to interfere in the 2016 election.

It is impossible to ignore something that did not happen.

He is also friends with the person who leaked non-public information to the press, through a cutout, with the intention of getting revenge against the man who fired him from his job. 

Mueller and Comey were friends in the sense of being co-workers. They did not go to each other's houses to watch the game or have dinner.

Mueller then hired a team of lawyers who are nearly all Democrat partisans based on publicly available campaign finance information.

Professionals that are able to set aside their politics to do their job. Much like most law enforcement, judges, and other lawyers do on a daily basis.

The repetition of falsehoods by conservatives never gets old. It's somewhat comforting because it never changes.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

PTown & Stranger: Completely agree.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Toasted: Agreed. Not all conservatives are as ignorant and noisy as many that post.

It’s also true that not all Leftists that post here are dim witted sycophants - though there are one or two.

@wolfpack, why are you attributing that "agreed" quote to me?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Agreed. Not all conservatives are as ignorant and noisy as many that post.

You don’t want to hear opposing views? Is it better to just blindly agree?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yes, the agenda of the far and centre right is abhorrent to me. I see them as operating in the same sphere. I oppose the ideology and the status quo they seek to maintain.

But I respect their right to highlight their views, despite them being offensive and seeking to oppress the proletariat. I also suspect that individually, a good many of them consider themselves to be decent folk.

But blind allegiance to racist uber-capitalist demagogues like your President would sorely test the definition of decency.

Other opinions are available.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Despite Trump's attempts, presidents do not micromanage agencies like the DOJ and IRS. This means that Obama did not weaponize the IRS or authorize Fast and Furious.

It shouldn't matter whether NFL players stand.

The US doesn't have open borders and the Dems don't want open borders.

Funny, if they were so rational on the TV shows, they would debate conservatives instead of wanting to create a Jerry Springer style knock out party.

Seems to always be the conservative pundits shouting down and cutting the mics of liberals.

So why don’t the Liberals refrain from doing this.

Because you cannot refrain from doing something you do not do.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Yes, the agenda of the far and centre right is abhorrent to me.

What about the far left and the Progressive left? They are totally abhorrent as well as an embarrassment to me, not to mention laughable.

I see them as operating in the same sphere. I oppose the ideology and the status quo they seek to maintain.

Then you hate liberals the same as I do! Well, we finally agree on something.

But I respect their right to highlight their views, despite them being offensive and seeking to oppress the proletariat.

I really don't respect the left, but I will listen to whatever they have to say, I guess.

I also suspect that individually, a good many of them consider themselves to be decent folk. 

Believe it or not, but you do have a few decent liberals as well.

But blind allegiance to racist uber-capitalist demagogues like your President would sorely test the definition of decency.

Well, the man is not a racist, but as a capitalist I truly respect him for that, brilliant and I hope he goes as far as he can. I would hate this country to embrace socialism of any kind.

Other opinions are available.

Yes, this is very true.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

The US doesn't have open borders and the Dems don't want open borders.

Huh? And the French invented Mickey Mouse. LOL

Not only do we have problems with open borders, now if you never lived in an open border state or are a foreigner that doesn't know anything about the US border states, a person might say that, but in reality once the cornbread is wiped from the eyes, the border in many areas is like a sieve.

Because you cannot refrain from doing something you do not do.

But they do, that's the problem.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

I really don't respect the left, but I will listen to whatever they have to say, I guess.

Ok, that's good news. Appreciate it.

Believe it or not, but you do have a few decent liberals as well.

I do? Thanks, I think... who would they be, taking into consideration that you've listened and know that left does not mean liberal.

Well, the man is not a racist, but

Ah well, so much for that good news. I guess there's little point in offering up the evidence again, is there? He could use the n-word and you'd still assert that he's not a racist.

as a capitalist I truly respect him for that, brilliant and I hope he goes as far as he can. I would hate this country to embrace socialism of any kind.

Equal rights and solidarity, helping your fellow men and women over making money on the blood and toil of others. Why is that so terrifying?

In the end, it doesn't matter whether it's Trump being tried or Clinton. Mueller can do both of them and the system will remain the same. Adapting socialism doesn't mean abandoning mammon, it just means adjusting it. I'd be quite happy going the whole way towards an anarchist (co-operative) society, where govt and money is a thing of the past but that's a while away, yet.

The shame about this whole debacle is that Trump's behaviour is condoned and indeed, encouraged by a rampant capitalist world. He knows the game, his lawyers know the game, everybody knows the game. Even Mueller does, despite best intentions. Whatever the outcome, the situation that allows it remains the same.

Something's got to give, mon ami.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Equal rights and solidarity, helping your fellow men and women over making money on the blood and toil of others. Why is that so terrifying? 

But protecting a tiny fish and destroying the lives of farmers is ok?

In the end, it doesn't matter whether it's Trump being tried or Clinton. Mueller can do both of them and the system will remain the same. Adapting socialism doesn't mean abandoning mammon, it just means adjusting it.

I would fight until my last dying breath to see that never take root.

I'd be quite happy going the whole way towards an anarchist (co-operative) society, where govt and money is a thing of the past but that's a while away, yet.

Hopefully way afte my great grandkids pass away.

The shame about this whole debacle is that Trump's behaviour is condoned and indeed, encouraged by a rampant capitalist world. He knows the game, his lawyers know the game, everybody knows the game. Even Mueller does, despite best intentions. Whatever the outcome, the situation that allows it remains the same.

Something's got to give, mon ami.

Just limit the size of government, leave people alone, allow them to determine the destiny of their lives and how they see fit, create more private sector jobs, allow Growth to take root and everything else will naturally fall in place.

I do? Thanks, I think... who would they be, taking into consideration that you've listened and know that left does not mean liberal.

And right doesn’t mean conservative.

Ah well, so much for that good news. I guess there's little point in offering up the evidence again, is there? He could use the n-word and you'd still assert that he's not a racist

If Whites and Hispanics use it, it’s racist? But if Blacks use it, it’s not? Why is that. Why can they say such a demeaning word amongst themselves, but don’t want others to use it. I find that very perplexing to say the least.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I would fight until my last dying breath to see that never take root.

Many of your compratriots felt the same about slavery, women's suffrage and civil rights.

Is making money at the expense of others more important than equality for all?

You'd really fight to the end, in order to prevent bread, medicine and a roof over the head for all?

The abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion, is that so terrifying?

You'd have no Muellers, Clintons or Trumps. There'd be no need for them. It would be an America for the people and by the people with none of these fraudulent "leaders" to mess it up.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Many of your compratriots felt the same about slavery, women's suffrage and civil rights

Same here.

Is making money at the expense of others more important than equality for all?

That depends on the circumstances and over variables.

You'd really fight to the end, in order to prevent bread, medicine and a roof over the head for all?

You do both.

The abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion, is that so terrifying?

Yes.

You'd have no Muellers, Clintons or Trumps. There'd be no need for them. It would be an America for the people and by the people with none of these fraudulent "leaders" to mess it up.

And who would lead this hypothetical utopia?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Same here.

And who do you think my compatriots are?

And who would lead this hypothetical utopia?

That's just it, there would be no more leaders. The people would organise a co-operative economic system with democratic values and production focused on meeting human needs. The sort of system that Orwell witnessed in Catalonia.

It's no more fanstastical than believing capitalism will continue to exist (in it's present form, at any rate).

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Arch-Leftists are willing to bypass the Constitution with frequently overturned executive orders (see Obama)

For anyone who may be wondering why Obama giving executive orders is bypassing the constitution, while Trump (who has written more executive orders that any other president in the same period of time) is not thought by the right to be bypassing the constitution, it's because Obama is a Democrat and Trump is a Republican, and in the eyes of the far-right Republicans, being a Democrat is bypassing the constitution.

Just wanted to make sure that people who couldn't understand the above understood the logic of the far-right.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If Trump refuses to speak, he should be impeached, plain and simple because he is not above the law. I don't trust him. If your honest then you should have nothing to be concerned about.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

lawyers were concerned that given Trump's penchant for making false statements and contradicting himself, he could be charged with lying to investigators. - naturally he will be in trouble -might get into trouble possibly. Anyway he can't escape.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites