👱 The official butthurt Trump-hater thread

[Wild74]

Lenzner told police that Okuneye “got in his face.” Lezner then pushed back to create distance, he said.

Seems perfectly right for him to create distance from someone getting in your face. So from what i am reading you are ok with the two beating this man

[DAWG91]

3 minutes ago, PepeSilvia said:

He just couldn’t back it up and got his rear handed to him by a left wing snowflake. 

Don't you mean snowflakeS plural?  The title of article says "clears two men""."  Must've been some mighty tough snowflakes.  2 vs 1.  How impressive!

[PepeSilvia]

59 minutes ago, DAWG91 said:

Don't you mean snowflakeS plural?  The title of article says "clears two men""."  Must've been some mighty tough snowflakes.  2 vs 1.  How impressive!

No it didn’t. Read the actual article. 

[PepeSilvia]

1 hour ago, Wild74 said:

Lenzner told police that Okuneye “got in his face.” Lezner then pushed back to create distance, he said.

Seems perfectly right for him to create distance from someone getting in your face. So from what i am reading you are ok with the two beating this man

You conveniently skipped the part where he approached her and was calling her something derogatory. And yes if someone reacts that way to a female then they do deserve a beat down. 

[DAWG91]

26 minutes ago, PepeSilvia said:

No it didn’t. Read the actual article. 

Per the headline of the article "Oregan grand jury clears PAIR of pummeling man wearing MAGA hat..."

I rather enjoy teachable moments. To have a pair there must be 2.  Class dismissed.

[PepeSilvia]

58 minutes ago, DAWG91 said:

Per the headline of the article "Oregan grand jury clears PAIR of pummeling man wearing MAGA hat..."

I rather enjoy teachable moments. To have a pair there must be 2.  Class dismissed.

You said two men. Clearly it wasn’t. I love teachable moments also. 

[DAWG91]

1 hour ago, PepeSilvia said:

You said two men. Clearly it wasn’t. I love teachable moments also. 

With libs those terms are interchangeable so who knows....

[PepeSilvia]

11 minutes ago, DAWG91 said:

With libs those terms are interchangeable so who knows....

I’ll take your uninspired comeback as your admission of making a mistake. 

[DAWG91]

7 minutes ago, PepeSilvia said:

I’ll take your uninspired comeback as your admission of making a mistake. 

I did not read the article if thats what you mean.  Dont care.  And what i said about being interchangeable is correct.  Dont blame me because you guys are delusional and insane.

[PepeSilvia]

53 minutes ago, DAWG91 said:

I did not read the article if thats what you mean.  Dont care.  And what i said about being interchangeable is correct.  Dont blame me because you guys are delusional and insane.

So you just made a comment while knowingly being ignorant of the subject. I guess you are following in the footsteps of the hurricane meteorologist in chief. 

[DAWG91]

20 minutes ago, PepeSilvia said:

So you just made a comment while knowingly being ignorant of the subject. I guess you are following in the footsteps of the hurricane meteorologist in chief. 

I read the headline.  Figured it was a pair of guys, not a guy and a girl,  but i forgot liberal women can be just as insane and violent as the men (assuming the female is an actual,  biological female.) You can't take that for granted these days.  As far as the meterologist in chief comment,  hell he's no less accurate than the pros.  They rarely get anything right.  Proclaim to predict climate a century in advance,  but forecasts a week in advance are as reliable as the hillary-paid-for fake pee dossier.  Thanks for your insight.

[DaveTV1]

7 hours ago, Wild74 said:

I doubt he was trying to start the fight

I don't.  His wife wanted to see what reactions he would bring by wearing it.  I would like to really know how much the guy had to drink since he had been out bar hopping.  If he had been drinking, he was lucky to not be charged with a P.I..  I would also like to see the videos of him picking fights at the other bar.  While that had nothing to do with this incident, he escalated it by yapping at the woman who had been staring him down.  His wife should have simply recorded it, and she got her answer.  There wasn't a reason to start berating the woman for staring.  I'm sure not many people in the Portland area wear MAGA hats.  From the article I would agree that the charges should have been dismisses. However seeing the video could change my mind.  Of course the public will never see the video so I can't say the people  should have been charged or not for assault.  

In my mind it's very similar to the Hispanic family at the Texas Rangers game that "claimed" they were harassed by the guy sitting behind them.  There only evidence ?  A smiling happy family and a guy sitting behind them watching the Rangers game.  Every smart phone has a device on it to capture a video of the situation, and I'm fairly sure the Ball Park has video.  I haven't seen either, but the photo the woman posted on her facebook page, so that guy is still innocent to me.  

[DaveTV1]

6 hours ago, Wild74 said:

He didn't lay a hand on those folks but he got the beating, both of those charged should have to pay a price for punching him. Left wing thugs don't pay a price for the most part. 

I didn't think about that.  However we don't know who assaulted who first.  Did he shove them or touch them in anyway ?  If so they had every right to defend themselves.  

[DaveTV1]

55 minutes ago, PepeSilvia said:

So you just made a comment while knowingly being ignorant of the subject. I guess you are following in the footsteps of the hurricane meteorologist in chief. 

Everyone saw the initial numerous paths that Dorian could have taken, and it could have included Texas at one point.  That is for another thread however.  

[PepeSilvia]

33 minutes ago, DAWG91 said:

I read the headline.  Figured it was a pair of guys, not a guy and a girl,  but i forgot liberal women can be just as insane and violent as the men (assuming the female is an actual,  biological female.) You can't take that for granted these days.  As far as the meterologist in chief comment,  hell he's no less accurate than the pros.  They rarely get anything right.  Proclaim to predict climate a century in advance,  but forecasts a week in advance are as reliable as the hillary-paid-for fake pee dossier.  Thanks for your insight.

Again, you decided to make a comment on something that you were ignorant of even though you had the opportunity to read about it. What’s funny is that you were so certain you were right in your comment. Then when you were proven wrong you just decided to belittle liberals. 

[DAWG91]

Hardly the end of the world.  Wont lose a wink of sleep over it.  And sorry but libs belittle themselves just fine dont need any help from me.  Im just playing along with their insanity. When i say it cannot be assumed the female is an actual female i speak truth.

[PepeSilvia]

7 minutes ago, DAWG91 said:

Hardly the end of the world.  Wont lose a wink of sleep over it.  And sorry but libs belittle themselves just fine dont need any help from me.  Im just playing along with their insanity. When i say it cannot be assumed the female is an actual female i speak truth.

You keep on enjoying your membership in the Dunning Kruger club. 

[DAWG91]

1 hour ago, PepeSilvia said:

You keep on enjoying your membership in the Dunning Kruger club. 

Quit projecting.  It's of no consequence.  If i'm going to be wrong on something,  I prefer it be something trivial as this.  Leftist judge lets a pair of leftists go free.  Shocker.  It was a girl and a guy and not 2 guys.  Woopty friggin doo.  My original correction of your snowflake statement still stands.  It was snowflakeS plural.   You're welcome.

[PepeSilvia]

1 hour ago, DAWG91 said:

Quit projecting.  It's of no consequence.  If i'm going to be wrong on something,  I prefer it be something trivial as this.  Leftist judge lets a pair of leftists go free.  Shocker.  It was a girl and a guy and not 2 guys.  Woopty friggin doo.  My original correction of your snowflake statement still stands.  It was snowflakeS plural.   You're welcome.

Thank you for admitting that you are wrong. 

[Wild74]

15 hours ago, DaveTV1 said:

I didn't think about that.  However we don't know who assaulted who first.  Did he shove them or touch them in anyway ?  If so they had every right to defend themselves.  

He got his butt beat because he was acting a fool, and his girlfriend or wife is just as ignorant for egging him on. Being drunk in Portland and in a bar with people of the opposing view wearing a MEGA hat can get you a beat down....

[DaveTV1]

11 hours ago, Wild74 said:

He got his butt beat because he was acting a fool, and his girlfriend or wife is just as ignorant for egging him on. Being drunk in Portland and in a bar with people of the opposing view wearing a MEGA hat can get you a beat down....

That's the way I see it.  They wanted to see what would happen, and kept pushing and pushing until finally someone got tired of them being over zealous.  Wear your hat, and let them come to you, don't get in their face first.  

[PepeSilvia]

[BarryLaverty]

Very nice to be thought of, Geezy, so here's one for you of you! 

[BarryLaverty]

Keep seeing one part of the 'media' on here, but somehow something trivial like quashing a whistleblower complaint regarding our national interests doesn't show up. Someone throw up a video about transgender people to keep our minds off this...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/20/politics/donald-trump-whistleblower/index.html

New revelations deepen scandal over Trump whistleblower complaint

Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN

 

Updated 8:59 AM ET, Fri September 20, 2019

(CNN)Washington's newest scandal, over a whistleblower's complaint about President Donald Trump, intensified Thursday amid revelations that the White House and Justice Department tried to keep it quiet.

The affair, centering on Trump's contacts with a leader of a mystery foreign nation -- identified in two reports as Ukraine -- has also injected a toxic element into relations among the President, the intelligence community and Congress.

It is hard to see how any of this ends well.

Six months after special counsel Robert Mueller shut up shop, the White House again faces suspicion over Trump's dealings with a foreign power and seems to be taking steps to stop the full story from coming out.

 

 

Democrats are rummaging for new skeletons in Trump's closet and yet another showdown is developing between the executive and Congress that appears almost certain to play out in the courts.

The details of the controversy unleashed when a whistleblower sounded the alarm about the President are complex, disputed according to political allegiance and largely not public.

 

White House also involved in advising DNI not to share whistleblower complaint

The Washington Post and The New York Times reported Thursday that the contacts at issue between Trump and the foreign leader involve Ukraine. In the past, some of Trump's supporters, including his lawyer Rudy Giuliani, have urged the Kiev government to open investigations that the President could use to raise suspicions about his political rivals, including Joe Biden. In a heated exchange with CNN's Chris Cuomo on Thursday night, Giuliani denied asking Ukraine to investigate the former vice president, before admitting he had done just that.

The US and Ukraine were in discussions about $250 million in military aid to Kiev this summer that had been delayed by the White House. Giuliani said he didn't know anything about the package, but that if Trump had used it as leverage to benefit himself politically in any way he would not have done anything wrong.

"The reality is that the President of the United States, whoever he is, has every right to tell the president of another country you better straighten out the corruption in your country if you want me to give you a lot of money. If you're so damn corrupt that you can't investigate allegations -- our money is going to get squandered," Giuliani said.

MORE FROM STEPHEN COLLINSON

Trump and House Democrats snared in new intelligence storm

Absurd Lewandowski hearing raises doubts about Dems strategy

Trump is trapped between two impulses on Iran

New Kavanaugh claims detonate in heat of 2020 election

Trump attempted to discredit the whistleblower as "highly partisan" in a series of tweets Friday morning, echoing remarks made by Giuliani on Thursday night. The President said his comments to "a certain foreign leader" were "pitch perfect."

Trump tweeted: "Strange that with so many other people hearing or knowing of the perfectly fine and respectful conversation, that they would not have also come forward. Do you know the reason why they did not? Because there was nothing said wrong, it was pitch perfect!"

Trump spoke to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on July 25. There is so far no public evidence that the whistleblower's complaint pertains to this conversation or that there was any abuse of power by Trump. The White House later lifted the hold on aid.

But the potential ramifications of this new storm are already becoming clear and the risks facing the President, the intelligence community and Democrats in Congress are climbing by the day.

Disturbing possibilities

 

Intel Inspector General suggested whistleblower had concerns about multiple actions

There must at least be a possibility that Trump abused his power or committed a grievous ethical lapse in dealing with the foreign leader.

His defense was not exactly reassuring, considering some of the wild comments the President has made in the company of rogue counterparts such as Russia's Vladimir Putin and North Korea's Kim Jong Un.

"Is anybody dumb enough to believe that I would say something inappropriate with a foreign leader while on such a potentially 'heavily populated' call?" Trump tweeted on Thursday.

CNN reported Thursday that the intelligence community inspector general suggested to the House Intelligence Committee that the complaint raised concerns about multiple actions.

He would not say whether those instances involved Trump, sources familiar with the closed-door briefing told CNN.

The inspector general, Michael Atkinson, was legally unable to discuss the complaint itself, since Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire has declined to hand it over.

Democrats say he is compelled to provide the complaint under whistleblower legislation, and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said his committee may take legal action if it isn't turned over.

The Washington Post on Wednesday said the complaint referenced a "promise" Trump allegedly made to the unidentified leader. CNN has not confirmed that aspect of the controversy.

The whistleblower didn't have direct knowledge of the communications, an official briefed on the matter told CNN. Instead, the whistleblower's concerns came in part from learning information that was not obtained during the course of their work, and those details have played a role in the administration's determination that the complaint didn't fit the reporting requirements under the intelligence whistleblower law, the official said.

It is hard to know the potential exposure faced by the President.

But given the sensitivity of the issue, the complaint is likely to have come from an official familiar with the scope of presidential power. And it was signed off as "urgent and credible" by the inspector general -- a Trump appointee -- who thought Congress should know in line with whistleblowing laws.

The implication of such a fact pattern is staggering and opens up the potential of serious misconduct inside the White House -- despite Trump's denials of any wrongdoing.

A President maligned?

 

Trump at center of new intelligence storm as whistleblower mystery explodes

If, on the other hand, the alleged behavior by the President does not reach such a bar, the political fallout will be considerable. Trump, acting within his wide Article Two constitutional powers, may have been maligned and there will be accusations that the whistleblower -- though moving within the scope of the law -- will have overreached.

The President's suspicion of the intelligence community, which he sees as a "Deep State" bent on overthrowing him, will grow.

If a president cannot trust his own spies, and thinks they are working against him and not the country's enemies, then America's national security will be harmed.

The President's allies are already arguing that the controversy is simply another ruse by House Democrats to damage Trump.

"He has very wide authority, really unchecked authority, to talk to world leaders about anything he deems appropriate as he is representing the United States of America," said Matt Schlapp, chairman of the American Conservative Union."If this were able to go forward, any staffer in an agency could constantly hobble a Democratic President, duly elected."

"This is an unconstitutional argument," Schlapp said on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360."

Of course, the White House could clear all this up by explaining the contents of the alleged contacts between the President and the foreign leader. But it is taking the opposite tack.

According to three CNN sources, the White House and the Justice Department advised the director of national intelligence that the complaint isn't governed by laws covering intelligence whistleblowers.

The revelation is the first known evidence of the White House's involvement in the standoff. There may be an argument that the content of the President's communications or an official's impressions of them sent to Congress are subject to executive privilege.

But the administration's resistance to scrutiny is already fueling suspicions of a cover-up.

And it throws new light on the role of Attorney General William Barr -- who has been accused by critics of shaping special counsel Robert Mueller's damning revelations to the President's advantage.

Barr, who served in the same role for President George H.W. Bush, advocates a theory of expansive presidential power, one reason why he has become perhaps Trump's favorite Cabinet member.

Whistleblowers exposed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Play Video

 

 

Wolf Blitzer presses lawmaker over whistleblower complaint 02:02

House Democrats argue that the White House is yet again adopting a model of presidential power that threatens to tear the checks and balances of the US system to shreds.

Schiff effectively argued that the approach taken by the administration could lead to the quashing of whistleblower claims in the government.

That could lead down a road of power without accountability and in theory impunity for any presidential wrongdoing.

"The impact of this opinion is that if the Department of Justice decides that any employee of the intelligence committee comes forward, follows the law, follows the process, is nonetheless outside the process, they're not protected," the California Democrat said.

"Which not only means this whistleblower is not protected, it means no whistleblower is protected. That is the danger of the DOJ's misinterpretation of the law."

The fresh confrontation between the White House and the Congress is certain to fuel the frustration of Democrats at the White House's efforts to evade scrutiny.

And it will add momentum to claims of many grass roots liberals and a growing corps of House Democrats who do not share House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's reluctance to proceed with impeachment.

CNN's Pamela Brown, Evan Perez, Kevin Liptak and Manu Raju contributed to this report.

[TheNameIsDalton]

Barry......I want you to take your so called concern for our national interests.....roll them up real tight.....then stick them in your dirt hole.....you Hillary lover hypocrite.