Cont: The Trump Presidency 11: Insert something funny

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dr. Keith said:
It's all about definitions: Asking Trump to answer questions under oath is called a Perjury Trap and asking Trump to provide relevant documents is a Fishing Expedition. Indicting people related to Trump is a Witch Hunt and the guy who can shovel the most horse **** using only these definitions is the Stable Genius.
Click to expand...

calling the documents "relevant" is begging the question, abusing the legal process for political means is called "another day that ends in 'y' for the Democrat Party."

hang tough Mr. President, executive privilege and separation of powers needs you more than ever!
 
The Big Dog said:
Yes, do you have any evidence that the state AG's looking for tax return information is seeking proper evidence?
Click to expand...

Yes. The evidence is required to understand if Trump is violating the Emoluments clause of the US Constitution. The argument is that Trump is profiting from foreign governments. Trump may avoid having to produce Tax Returns before he ran for President. But given the suit, I doubt he will be able to prevent his latest returns from being obtained.
 
The Big Dog said:
calling the documents "relevant" is begging the question, abusing the legal process for political means is called "another day that ends in 'y' for the Democrat Party."

hang tough Mr. President, executive privilege and separation of powers needs you more than ever!
Click to expand...

Hang tough and keep that dirty laundry under wraps for as long as you can.

To hell with values and principles. Evangelicals have no need of them as long as you get your judges.
 
The Big Dog said:
calling the documents "relevant" is begging the question, abusing the legal process for political means is called "another day that ends in 'y' for the Democrat Party."

hang tough Mr. President, executive privilege and separation of powers needs you more than ever!
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The moron needs to stop lying and hiding the facts. What is he afraid of? The truth maybe?
 
:eye-poppii
acbytesla said:
Yes. The evidence is required to understand if Trump is violating the Emoluments clause of the US Constitution. The argument is that Trump is profiting from foreign governments. Trump may avoid having to produce Tax Returns before he ran for President. But given the suit, I doubt he will be able to prevent his latest returns from being obtained.
Click to expand...

They loved the drain the swamp chant but won’t let them expose the lay of the land for creature from the black lagoon’s marshlands.
 
Sideroxylon said:
Hang tough and keep that dirty laundry under wraps for as long as you can.

To hell with values and principles. Evangelicals have no need of them as long as you get your judges.
Click to expand...

That is the problem, someday, perhaps, the shoe will be on the other hand and Republicans will be fishing for dirty laundry about a Democrat president. Sure it will likely after President Pence's second term, but don't tell you The Big Dog didn't warn ya.
 
acbytesla said:
Nonsense. The moron needs to stop lying and hiding the facts. What is he afraid of? The truth maybe?
Click to expand...

Reminds me so much of this stuff


“If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment” - Trump

If you have nothing to hide, why not release your tax returns as other presidents have done and you promised to do?
 
The Big Dog said:
That is the problem, someday, perhaps, the shoe will be on the other hand and Republicans will be fishing for dirty laundry about a Democrat president. Sure it will likely after President Pence's second term, but don't tell you The Big Dog didn't warn ya.
Click to expand...

See there is that projection again that arises out of a failure to recognise the difference between today’s Republicans and Democrats, which I explained and demonstrated to you. Obama would have been torn apart by Democrats if he carried on like this crook.

No, public transparency is a critical element of good governance and prevention of conflict of interest and corruption. Will the values party ever have values again? Evangelicals may face an existential crisis after all this is done. A back to Jesus movement would be good.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
Yes, do you have any evidence that the state AG's looking for tax return information is seeking proper evidence?
Click to expand...
I didn't make any claim about the state AGs, so, no, I don't know about what evidence they may or may not have.

But said you did have some evidence that it's a fishing expedition, so it's time to present that evidence. Otherwise, it's just an empty claim.

What is that evidence?
 
The Big Dog said:
The suggestion that the secret service would let the President of the united States walk in public when the attention of the world is focused on DC because of the funeral is beyond ludicrous.

Sad!
Click to expand...

Would they let the President walk around on the day of the Inauguration when all eyes were on DC?
 
Paul2 said:
I didn't make any claim about the state AGs, so, no, I don't know about what evidence they may or may not have.

But said you did have some evidence that it's a fishing expedition, so it's time to present that evidence. Otherwise, it's just an empty claim.

What is that evidence?
Click to expand...

Well actually the burden is on the party seeking the info to show that it is a proper purpose, but I will simply point out that they are seeking documents from before the time he was President, you dig?
 
The Big Dog said:
Well actually the burden is on the party seeking the info to show that it is a proper purpose, but I will simply point out that they are seeking documents from before the time he was President, you dig?
Click to expand...
Why is it a fishing expedition if they seek documents from before the time he was President? Of course something that happened and was documented from before the time he was President could shed light on, or be relevant to, something that happened when he was President.
 
Paul2 said:
Why is it a fishing expedition if they seek documents from before the time he was President? Of course something that happened and was documented from before the time he was President could shed light on, or be relevant to, something that happened when he was President.
Click to expand...
Whitewater, anyone?
 
Paul2 said:
Why is it a fishing expedition if they seek documents from before the time he was President? Of course something that happened and was documented from before the time he was President could shed light on, or be relevant to, something that happened when he was President.
Click to expand...

"could" there is that word.

Sure, the democrats have been braying about getting their filthy hands on tax returns, but pinky swear, this time they are totes relevant to the very important claim.

Sorry, but that dog ain't gonna hunt.
 
The Big Dog said:
That is the problem, someday, perhaps, the shoe will be on the other hand and Republicans will be fishing for dirty laundry about a Democrat president. Sure it will likely after President Pence's second term, but don't tell you The Big Dog didn't warn ya.
Click to expand...

Ok, quit kidding around, some of the posters are taking your joke seriously.

For the more humor-impaired, The Big Dog is implying that if state AGs now ask for President Trump’s Return (which he promised to release before he changed his mind and said that folks wouldn’t understand it because it is so complicated), then Republican Attorney generals will ask to see a Democratic president’s tax return at some future date. The funny part is the flip side: that if state AGs don’t subpoena the president’s tax returns now then Republicans at a future date will say “well, no one subpoenaed President Trump’s tax returns, so it would be somewhat unfair for us to subpoena this Democratic president’s tax returns.”

The other funny part is the implication that a Democrat could get elected President without showing his tax returns.
 
The Big Dog said:
"could" there is that word.

Sure, the democrats have been braying about getting their filthy hands on tax returns, but pinky swear, this time they are totes relevant to the very important claim.

Sorry, but that dog ain't gonna hunt.
Click to expand...

Which raises the question, if there is absolutely no damning information in the tax returns, then why is he telling such outlandish lies in his efforts to keep them from being seen?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom