conserveguy877
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2015
- 6,514
- 2,621
![DQUryA-WAAIezGf.jpg:large](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQUryA-WAAIezGf.jpg:large)
Mueller is still dragging on this Trump Russia hoax?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Look it up genius...it's on a thing called the Internet.They contribute to both parties as they are all billionaires and can afford to do so.They only own Congress.
They do? Weird... how much money did they give to the majority party?
They do? Fascinating. You sure? How much? Equally?
I have not heard anything about a Constitutional crisis much like I have not seen or heard this investigation come up with anything on Russian interference during the election or Russian collusion which is supposed to be what it was empowered to do.Sounds like a whole lot of nothing again.
Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
Look it up genius...it's on a thing called the Internet.They contribute to both parties as they are all billionaires and can afford to do so.They only own Congress.
They do? Weird... how much money did they give to the majority party?
They do? Fascinating. You sure? How much? Equally?
No actually I am as I understand it only the deputy attorney general who appointed Mueller can fire him and only for cause according to special counsel regulations. So if Trump can't Mueller there is no constitutional crisis take your own advice in regards to paying attention.I have not heard anything about a Constitutional crisis much like I have not seen or heard this investigation come up with anything on Russian interference during the election or Russian collusion which is supposed to be what it was empowered to do.Sounds like a whole lot of nothing again.
Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
Then you are not paying attention. Trump specifically drew a red line at Mueller looking into his family finances, and his firing of Mueller would intiate a constitutional crisis. Pay attention!
I doubt there's anything to this.
I know some of the players involved, and I would be utterly shocked if this was anything more than a commercial transaction.
Simply put, Trump was a pariah on Wall Street because they considered him a liar and a cheat (surprise, surprise) for his prior dealings, so nobody would lend to him. DB was trying to get a foothold in the American market, so they lent to those who had bad credit. They charged through the nose for their capital, so there was a price, but Trump wasn't the only person with bad credit to whom they lent. He also paid them back.
I talked to his former banker before the election. He told me that Trump wasn't "as crazy as he seems," and that he was a very hard-working guy. He also said he had no friends in the true meaning of the word, which you've heard others echo in the press. He maintained a relationship with Trump at least until recently.
Gotta admit..not really sure what a sock is..I'm guessing a dummy account? Anyway..any admin can vouch for my IP..not that it matters..as we have established that you will lie at the drop of a hat..any remarks from you..can only amuse.Whatever the fuck that means...ignorant, inbred liar. You are that lowest of creature..a deliberate liar who sells the shreds of his honor just to make a political point on a Msg. board. Pathetic toilet scum.You are truly shameless..you know that is not true..know it..and yet you continue---zero respect for a deliberate liar.Why did Kushner bother to take a loan when all he had to do was sell another 20% of our uranium?
Look sock girl, if you had a fucking shred of decency you would have to run dozens of sock account so please stuff a fucking sock in it
Sock boy lecturing about honor breaks the irony meter.
Lol..weak..very weak. is OK..if you wish to remain in the closet..is your choice.I am only saying what I have heard of from other Dems...tastes like chicken they say,So..an expert on the taste of Democratic loins, are you? Who'd have thunk it!Yeah, it tastes like freshly scorched Democrat pork loin, lolThis nothing burger is getting juicer and tastier everyday.
Some international banks are international and not american and some people lieCause you handed to them right? LOLSo how is it then I wonder the bank is cooperating? LOLAnd it was all a lie. No subpoena, no request, nothing. It was a total lie.
Just breaking.
Because they did receive a subpoena, and Trump's lawyer did what all of Trump's lawyers always do: he lied.
No, because banks don't hand over information about clients without a subpoena. In fact, it would be illegal to do so. Pay attention!
Gotta love Mueller.
Deutsche Bank receives subpoena from Mueller on Trump accounts: source
FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Special Counsel Robert Mueller has asked Deutsche Bank (DBKGn.DE) to share data on accounts held by U.S. President Donald Trump and his family, a person close to the matter said on Tuesday.
There’s nothing privateLol..weak..very weak. is OK..if you wish to remain in the closet..is your choice.I am only saying what I have heard of from other Dems...tastes like chicken they say,So..an expert on the taste of Democratic loins, are you? Who'd have thunk it!Yeah, it tastes like freshly scorched Democrat pork loin, lolThis nothing burger is getting juicer and tastier everyday.
Unless he’s corruptSounds like a whole lot of nothing again.
Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
FACT.. Duetchse Bank has not been served with anything and they deny that they have received anything. Mueller states he has not served anything as it would be outside the scope of his investigation. Whom to believe... The unnamed source or those who know? YOU LOSE..!wow..Trump is guilty of Obstruction of collusion! Putin! Deutsche Bank! Something!!
Will you think it a joke when both the President and Vice President are impeached? I will think it is hilarious!
The WH lawyers lied about there not being a subpoena to Deutsche Bank....again. And you Trumpettes just gobbled it up like candy. May I ask you:
DO YOU HAVE A BRAIN?
The deranged fucktards are out in force...
yes, you are. but luckily the normal people get to show you for the losers you are.
Of course, the President can sack Mueller in a number of ways. Even attempting it would be the beginning of the end of his Presidency, though.No actually I am as I understand it only the deputy attorney general who appointed Mueller can fire him and only for cause according to special counsel regulations. So if Trump can't Mueller there is no constitutional crisis take your own advice in regards to paying attention.I have not heard anything about a Constitutional crisis much like I have not seen or heard this investigation come up with anything on Russian interference during the election or Russian collusion which is supposed to be what it was empowered to do.Sounds like a whole lot of nothing again.
Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
Then you are not paying attention. Trump specifically drew a red line at Mueller looking into his family finances, and his firing of Mueller would intiate a constitutional crisis. Pay attention!
Unless he’s corruptSounds like a whole lot of nothing again.
Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
Some international banks are international and not american and some people lieCause you handed to them right? LOLSo how is it then I wonder the bank is cooperating? LOLAnd it was all a lie. No subpoena, no request, nothing. It was a total lie.
Just breaking.
Because they did receive a subpoena, and Trump's lawyer did what all of Trump's lawyers always do: he lied.
No, because banks don't hand over information about clients without a subpoena. In fact, it would be illegal to do so. Pay attention!
None of which have been attempted so there is no constitutional crisis and what someone hypothetical could do does not constitute one.Of course, the President can sack Mueller in a number of ways. Even attempting it would be the beginning of the end of his Presidency, though.No actually I am as I understand it only the deputy attorney general who appointed Mueller can fire him and only for cause according to special counsel regulations. So if Trump can't Mueller there is no constitutional crisis take your own advice in regards to paying attention.I have not heard anything about a Constitutional crisis much like I have not seen or heard this investigation come up with anything on Russian interference during the election or Russian collusion which is supposed to be what it was empowered to do.Sounds like a whole lot of nothing again.
Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
Then you are not paying attention. Trump specifically drew a red line at Mueller looking into his family finances, and his firing of Mueller would intiate a constitutional crisis. Pay attention!
None of which have been attempted so there is no constitutional crisis and what someone hypothetical could do does not constitute one.Of course, the President can sack Mueller in a number of ways. Even attempting it would be the beginning of the end of his Presidency, though.No actually I am as I understand it only the deputy attorney general who appointed Mueller can fire him and only for cause according to special counsel regulations. So if Trump can't Mueller there is no constitutional crisis take your own advice in regards to paying attention.I have not heard anything about a Constitutional crisis much like I have not seen or heard this investigation come up with anything on Russian interference during the election or Russian collusion which is supposed to be what it was empowered to do.Does it? In my experience, Presidents don't threaten to initiate a Constitutional crisis over "nothing".
Then you are not paying attention. Trump specifically drew a red line at Mueller looking into his family finances, and his firing of Mueller would intiate a constitutional crisis. Pay attention!
And yet nothing has happened which goes back to my orginal point of this being a whole lot of nothing. In fact this seems to be going the way all these special prosecutor investigatons dating back to Clinton go when you can't find what you were orginally empowered to look for look into anything and everything to try and justify the time and money being used on it.None of which have been attempted so there is no constitutional crisis and what someone hypothetical could do does not constitute one.Of course, the President can sack Mueller in a number of ways. Even attempting it would be the beginning of the end of his Presidency, though.No actually I am as I understand it only the deputy attorney general who appointed Mueller can fire him and only for cause according to special counsel regulations. So if Trump can't Mueller there is no constitutional crisis take your own advice in regards to paying attention.I have not heard anything about a Constitutional crisis much like I have not seen or heard this investigation come up with anything on Russian interference during the election or Russian collusion which is supposed to be what it was empowered to do.
Then you are not paying attention. Trump specifically drew a red line at Mueller looking into his family finances, and his firing of Mueller would intiate a constitutional crisis. Pay attention!
I didnt say there was a constitutional crisis. I am saying that Trump threatened to initiate one, should Mueller look into his family's finances.
Don't look now...but that is exactly what Mueller is doing.