But hes all good now that he is a convicted felon but on your side, huh?
lololol So, you think Cohen would lie, and in the process incriminate himself? I think that's pretty unlikely.
4 ( +4 / -0 )
If you would bother to read before trying to dunk on someone (and fail) , you would easily know.
I did read the article. Dropping a generic "she"" in article with multiple women mentioned doesn't make it easy to understand.
At any rate, you're argument is Trump isn't a pedophile because one witness said she didn't see him on the island? This logic is rather absurd.
Remember folks, Donald wishes Ms. Maxwell well. Lol
1 ( +1 / -0 )
The criminal? I am talking about the deposition from the victim who said Clinton was there.
Lol how would I know? You're the moving straight to pronouns without properly identifying them.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
no, actually she testified Trump wasnt there with Clinton on the island.
Lolol so, now you're trusting the criminal. I recall how much you "trusted" Cohen. Lol even he wasn't on the island, doesn't mean he didn't pedo it up with them.
And finally, why wish a sexual offender like her well? Will she get a commuted sentence like Stone did? If so, I wonder why.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
so we now have confirmation Bill Clinton was on the island, right?
Lol! Right along with Donald, no doubt. Donald wishes her well. :D
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Same answer he gave in 2016. He did “see”. He saw that he won.
lololol Okay, so how is "we'll see," an acceptable answer to the question, "Will you accept the results if you lose?" Donald doesn't believe in democracy and neither do Republicans, they'll only accept the results if they in their favor.
7 ( +8 / -1 )
So the direct quote from Trump was “I have to see”. Ok wouldn’t that make sense to see the results first?
lololol No. The question from Chris Wallace was, "If you lose the election, will you accept the results?"
"We'll see," isn't an acceptable answer, but it is a hardly surprising one coming from a sore winner Trump, who tried claiming he would have won the popular vote if not for illegal voting.
8 ( +8 / -0 )
Basically fell in the trap again, to claim he said something he didnt and to show the Dem and media bias, dishonesty and hatred.
You're darn right Democrats hate Donald the career criminal. You're darn right they hate a man who has always put himself before everyone else. my only question is why aren't you bothered by it?
11 ( +12 / -1 )
That whole episode was hilarious. After hitting Bregman, he then made 3 pick off moves at him as well. Lol
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Oh congratulations you found one guy, maybe. Already been misidentified once before and no arrest yet.
Its a few more than one.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
The point is, when Holder said, he stood proudly by Obama, every Dem was silent.
You might have a point if half a dozen Obama campaign officials were convicted of felonies committed over the course of a campaign. Of course, that never happened, so you don't have a point.
4 ( +7 / -3 )
its amazing what liberals will support if they think it hurts Trump or makes him look bad. Lying, rioting, violence, theft, misrepresentation, arson, murder, explosives, assault.
How courageous of you to come and admit lying is wrong. Why is it only okay when Donald does it? Why is arson okay when right wing extremists do it?
(hint; this is helping Trump, not hurting him at all, you might want to stop doing it)
lololol According to who? How would you know?
3 ( +6 / -3 )
Great line of questioning by Swallwell. Apparently Barr doesn't read Trump's tweets, but he says they make his job difficult. lololol
4 ( +6 / -2 )
Even we get good news most people here seem to only want to see bad news. These numbers will go up and down so we need to learn how to live with it and if you are worried then stay home and lock down yourself.
Maybe because it isnt all good news? 131/864 people came back positive. That was over the 4 day weekend.
Just a few days ago when we had over 366 cases I'm willing to bet more than double or triple the number of cases were done.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
Kennedy is not an antivaxxer, he is against giving vaccines that have not been adequately tested.
Kennedy claims not to be against vaccinations in much the same way a lot of racists claim not to be. His organization is absolutely bonkers.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Meanwhile, lawmaker Yasuhiko Funago, an ALS patient and member of the political party Reiwa Shinsengumi, said in a statement, "The most important thing is to create a society that protects the 'right to live' over the 'right to die.'"
Kind of an odd thing for a person in "Reiwa Shinsengumi" to say. I wonder if he's aware of how many of their leaders committed Seppuku or killed others?
10 ( +12 / -2 )
So just hide your guy in the basement then. Every interview is a disaster, even with notes and preapproved questions. See you at the debate Joe.
Same for Trump. lol If he is such a genius debater, I wonder why he'd threaten to pull out of the debates.
6 ( +6 / -0 )
I have no idea what you are talking about. There are debates already scheduled which will be held
Let me help you:
"impeach him if he wont debate!," you mockingly write. It is almost comical how the right changes their tune to whatever Donald says.
5 ( +5 / -0 )
No, everyone except “anybody but Trump” people want to know who and what they are voting for. Debates and interviews are part of this process.
A rather odd thing for a Trump fan, who supported the Trump's threat to bypass the commission on presidential debates.
7 ( +7 / -0 )
so basically you are crying that the wrong law enforcement group is arresting these lawbreakers?
lol I'm not crying. I'm telling you its garbage to have the CBP doing law enforcement activities in a city hundreds of miles away from the border.
The mayor of Portland is a known Antifa supporter, not like he will let his police force arrest anyone.
lol As we all should be, we should all stand up against Fascism, not stand for it. Its really interesting you think the mayor of Portland wants violence in his city, that doesn't even make sense. Does it?
No one was held indefinitely and law enforcement is allowed to have unmarked vehicles.
Ahh, but that's not what the article says. They're also required to identify themselves, which they didn't. And if they're detaining, or holding someone against their will, they're supposed to read their Miranda rights. That didn't happen.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
Good, but not great. 98.6% sounds great until you start testing tens of millions.
-5 ( +2 / -7 )
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the United States Congress from enacting legislation that would abridge the right of the people to assemble peaceably.
lol So what? Even if you're not peacefully protesting, CBP shouldn't be arresting people in Portland. CBP shouldn't be grabbing people and putting them into unmarked vans and holding them indefinitely. There is 0 excuse for what this administration is doing.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
Oh like their government forcing them to stay at home, closing schools for their children and enforcing mandatory masks if they dare to leave their home? Like that kind of erosion of liberty?
Lolololol the Constitution protects you from illegal detainments, searches and seizures, it says nothing about wearing about wearing masks. Your inconvenience isn't oppression.
Comparing these illegal detainments to being told to wear a mask is comically absurd.
6 ( +8 / -2 )
Just 3 months before the elections, talk about right timing..the NDA speaks a lot about her relation or rather no relation with Trump.
No, no, no. It doesn't say anything about her. Donald is party to all these NDAs. What does it say about a man who has ex-partners, family members, and employees sign NDAs? That's not normal.
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
And to be fair, that goes for any President regardless of the political fence they sit on. Medical maybe, taxes, don't care.
That is frankly the most absurd thing I've ever read. Conflict of interest? Don't care. Indebted to foreign lenders? I don't care. Tax friend? I don't care. Seems to me that you believe presidents are king, as if they aren't accountable to anyone.
Donald won't be president forever. If this is the precedent you want to set, what will you do when you feel the next president needs more oversight, shrug your shoulders and say, "I don't care?"
6 ( +6 / -0 )
at least the Dems won't get anything for a very long time and even then, it might not be this year and into his second term?
Lol Again, you keep saying this, but why are transparency and accountability bad? Why shouldn't the SDNY, at the very least, be able to access his tax returns?
5 ( +5 / -0 )
He doesn’t have to, the haters just won’t be lucky......again.
He doesn't have to, but his accountant does. That was the whole point of the supreme court rulings. He lost. He has to submit them.
6 ( +7 / -1 )
lol Why worry? Trump is very, very transparent. Clearly we can see from his tax returns. Why would the Trump administration want to pad the numbers? I can't understand. :D
4 ( +5 / -1 )
That won’t happen anytime soon, thankfully.
lol Why thankfully? Its almost as if you know exactly what a crook the president is.
That made absolutely no sense whatsoever. Of course it has absolutely nothing to do with his decision making concerning his taxes.
lolololol Back at you. You seem to think that the period between his presidency and before are somehow separate. They're not. Why do you think the FBI runs a credit check on applicants?
8 ( +8 / -0 )