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.
What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
How many hours did Hillary stand before Congress ? How many for the liar and thief?What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
Lots of liars and hypocrites there McConnell Graham Trump lead the packI have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
Sure you want investigations when you have democrat partisans in all the top echelons of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, and the intel agencies. What about after 8-years of Trump and he puts partisan conservatives in charge of those agencies and they overlook GOP crimes and investigate the crap out of democrats?
Then there is the Kavanaugh treatment where you democrats get bimbos to swear that they were sexually assaulted by the opposition candidates. Creeps like Avenatti love to find bimbos to split some cash with.
How do you square Hillary's illegal server, her destroying subpoenaed evidence, her mishandling classified info, and her pay-to-play Foundation?
(Hint: Yes you do have a double standard. She is very shady)
All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
Sure you want investigations when you have democrat partisans in all the top echelons of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, and the intel agencies. What about after 8-years of Trump and he puts partisan conservatives in charge of those agencies and they overlook GOP crimes and investigate the crap out of democrats?
Then there is the Kavanaugh treatment where you democrats get bimbos to swear that they were sexually assaulted by the opposition candidates. Creeps like Avenatti love to find bimbos to split some cash with.
How do you square Hillary's illegal server, her destroying subpoenaed evidence, her mishandling classified info, and her pay-to-play Foundation?
(Hint: Yes you do have a double standard. She is very shady)
The very idea of a "deep state" is silly. If such a thing existed they would adore Trump for his plutocratic ways and willingness to let big business run wild. You keep defaulting back to a conspiracy theory that only exists to make it seem that those opposing this deeply compromised president are far worse than he can ever be.All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?The president is not a private citizen anymore and does not have the same privacy rights we do. Working for the government in any capacity implies consent for your entire life to be put under a microscope. Somehow Trump and his Trumpbots seem surprised by this.
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
Sure you want investigations when you have democrat partisans in all the top echelons of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, and the intel agencies. What about after 8-years of Trump and he puts partisan conservatives in charge of those agencies and they overlook GOP crimes and investigate the crap out of democrats?
Then there is the Kavanaugh treatment where you democrats get bimbos to swear that they were sexually assaulted by the opposition candidates. Creeps like Avenatti love to find bimbos to split some cash with.
How do you square Hillary's illegal server, her destroying subpoenaed evidence, her mishandling classified info, and her pay-to-play Foundation?
(Hint: Yes you do have a double standard. She is very shady)
There is a difference between real obstruction, and phony obstruction. Mueller was never obstructed, he had all the time and resources he needed.
Obstructing an illegal investigation is not obstruction, its protecting the presidency. The Mueller Investigation into Trump was Strzok's "insurance policy". As Dershowitz said, the Mueller Investigation should have been a Joint Committee looking only into Russian Meddling. Obama's spying on the Trump campaign with US and foreign intel assets was the biggest scandal in US history. The FISA warrants were illegally obtained. Carter Page was totally innocent, and never charged with anything, yet the FBI could spy on all of the Trump people using the 2-hop rule.
In summary, if you have obstruction, impeach, because if you miss your shot, Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz surly won't miss their shots at taking down the deep state.
The very idea of a "deep state" is silly. If such a thing existed they would adore Trump for his plutocratic ways and willingness to let big business run wild. You keep defaulting back to a conspiracy theory that only exists to make it seem that those opposing this deeply compromised president are far worse than he can ever be.All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.What about when he is a candidate? Better yet, what if his opponent committed several obvious crimes? According to your rules, does candidate A get his entire life investigated, while candidate B gets endorsed and the crimes waived off?
Then when the investigation finds no crimes, the investigator says "we can exonerate him"??
Does the phrase "double-standard" mean anything to you?
Sure you want investigations when you have democrat partisans in all the top echelons of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, and the intel agencies. What about after 8-years of Trump and he puts partisan conservatives in charge of those agencies and they overlook GOP crimes and investigate the crap out of democrats?
Then there is the Kavanaugh treatment where you democrats get bimbos to swear that they were sexually assaulted by the opposition candidates. Creeps like Avenatti love to find bimbos to split some cash with.
How do you square Hillary's illegal server, her destroying subpoenaed evidence, her mishandling classified info, and her pay-to-play Foundation?
(Hint: Yes you do have a double standard. She is very shady)
There is a difference between real obstruction, and phony obstruction. Mueller was never obstructed, he had all the time and resources he needed.
Obstructing an illegal investigation is not obstruction, its protecting the presidency. The Mueller Investigation into Trump was Strzok's "insurance policy". As Dershowitz said, the Mueller Investigation should have been a Joint Committee looking only into Russian Meddling. Obama's spying on the Trump campaign with US and foreign intel assets was the biggest scandal in US history. The FISA warrants were illegally obtained. Carter Page was totally innocent, and never charged with anything, yet the FBI could spy on all of the Trump people using the 2-hop rule.
In summary, if you have obstruction, impeach, because if you miss your shot, Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz surly won't miss their shots at taking down the deep state.
1. I read your link and my statement stands, if THEM exists they love TrumpThe very idea of a "deep state" is silly. If such a thing existed they would adore Trump for his plutocratic ways and willingness to let big business run wild. You keep defaulting back to a conspiracy theory that only exists to make it seem that those opposing this deeply compromised president are far worse than he can ever be.All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.I have no double standard, investigate every seeming wrongdoing on everyone who wants to lead this nation. Anyone unwilling to submit to public scrutiny is unfit. At some point you will agree with this as soon as your man is out of office and a democrat takes his place. Quit voting for shady characters and you will not have to wrestle with this terrible dilemma.
Sure you want investigations when you have democrat partisans in all the top echelons of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, and the intel agencies. What about after 8-years of Trump and he puts partisan conservatives in charge of those agencies and they overlook GOP crimes and investigate the crap out of democrats?
Then there is the Kavanaugh treatment where you democrats get bimbos to swear that they were sexually assaulted by the opposition candidates. Creeps like Avenatti love to find bimbos to split some cash with.
How do you square Hillary's illegal server, her destroying subpoenaed evidence, her mishandling classified info, and her pay-to-play Foundation?
(Hint: Yes you do have a double standard. She is very shady)
There is a difference between real obstruction, and phony obstruction. Mueller was never obstructed, he had all the time and resources he needed.
Obstructing an illegal investigation is not obstruction, its protecting the presidency. The Mueller Investigation into Trump was Strzok's "insurance policy". As Dershowitz said, the Mueller Investigation should have been a Joint Committee looking only into Russian Meddling. Obama's spying on the Trump campaign with US and foreign intel assets was the biggest scandal in US history. The FISA warrants were illegally obtained. Carter Page was totally innocent, and never charged with anything, yet the FBI could spy on all of the Trump people using the 2-hop rule.
In summary, if you have obstruction, impeach, because if you miss your shot, Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz surly won't miss their shots at taking down the deep state.
1. The deep state exists and it is based on globalism, not nationalism Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia
2. Please provide a link proving that Trump is "deeply compromised". That makes no sense to me. You think Putin is dangling a Moscow Trump Tower deal? Is that your "deeply compromised"?
3. I support the loyal opposition, but not the deep state that Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz will prosecute. The GOP opposed everything that Obama stood for, but they used their positions legally, the Obama admin apparently spied on the Trump campaign illegally, and that needs to be punished.
1. I read your link and my statement stands, if THEM exists they love TrumpThe very idea of a "deep state" is silly. If such a thing existed they would adore Trump for his plutocratic ways and willingness to let big business run wild. You keep defaulting back to a conspiracy theory that only exists to make it seem that those opposing this deeply compromised president are far worse than he can ever be.All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.Sure you want investigations when you have democrat partisans in all the top echelons of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, and the intel agencies. What about after 8-years of Trump and he puts partisan conservatives in charge of those agencies and they overlook GOP crimes and investigate the crap out of democrats?
Then there is the Kavanaugh treatment where you democrats get bimbos to swear that they were sexually assaulted by the opposition candidates. Creeps like Avenatti love to find bimbos to split some cash with.
How do you square Hillary's illegal server, her destroying subpoenaed evidence, her mishandling classified info, and her pay-to-play Foundation?
(Hint: Yes you do have a double standard. She is very shady)
There is a difference between real obstruction, and phony obstruction. Mueller was never obstructed, he had all the time and resources he needed.
Obstructing an illegal investigation is not obstruction, its protecting the presidency. The Mueller Investigation into Trump was Strzok's "insurance policy". As Dershowitz said, the Mueller Investigation should have been a Joint Committee looking only into Russian Meddling. Obama's spying on the Trump campaign with US and foreign intel assets was the biggest scandal in US history. The FISA warrants were illegally obtained. Carter Page was totally innocent, and never charged with anything, yet the FBI could spy on all of the Trump people using the 2-hop rule.
In summary, if you have obstruction, impeach, because if you miss your shot, Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz surly won't miss their shots at taking down the deep state.
1. The deep state exists and it is based on globalism, not nationalism Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia
2. Please provide a link proving that Trump is "deeply compromised". That makes no sense to me. You think Putin is dangling a Moscow Trump Tower deal? Is that your "deeply compromised"?
3. I support the loyal opposition, but not the deep state that Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz will prosecute. The GOP opposed everything that Obama stood for, but they used their positions legally, the Obama admin apparently spied on the Trump campaign illegally, and that needs to be punished.
2. Trump was deeply compromised by the megatons of baggage he has accumulated as an adulterer and shady businessman in addition to what the Russians have on him. Never doubt that Putin has career ending dirt on Trump and he knows it.
3. I have difficulty responding to a statement that is entirely based on the "deep state" theory that is itself based on a mass of misrepresentation and ignorance of how things work when someone is stupidly caught up in a counter-intelligence operation. Seriously, I am fully prepared to accept that Trump is too stupid to realize even talking to Russian spies might cause him and his cronies some trouble.
1. I read your link and my statement stands, if THEM exists they love TrumpThe very idea of a "deep state" is silly. If such a thing existed they would adore Trump for his plutocratic ways and willingness to let big business run wild. You keep defaulting back to a conspiracy theory that only exists to make it seem that those opposing this deeply compromised president are far worse than he can ever be.All this current discussion is a way to make obstruction of justice an honorable thing in your mind. It's not, it's an affront to the idea that we are a nation of laws. Congressional oversight of the executive is enshrined in the constitution as both a power and a responsibility.
There is a difference between real obstruction, and phony obstruction. Mueller was never obstructed, he had all the time and resources he needed.
Obstructing an illegal investigation is not obstruction, its protecting the presidency. The Mueller Investigation into Trump was Strzok's "insurance policy". As Dershowitz said, the Mueller Investigation should have been a Joint Committee looking only into Russian Meddling. Obama's spying on the Trump campaign with US and foreign intel assets was the biggest scandal in US history. The FISA warrants were illegally obtained. Carter Page was totally innocent, and never charged with anything, yet the FBI could spy on all of the Trump people using the 2-hop rule.
In summary, if you have obstruction, impeach, because if you miss your shot, Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz surly won't miss their shots at taking down the deep state.
1. The deep state exists and it is based on globalism, not nationalism Deep state in the United States - Wikipedia
2. Please provide a link proving that Trump is "deeply compromised". That makes no sense to me. You think Putin is dangling a Moscow Trump Tower deal? Is that your "deeply compromised"?
3. I support the loyal opposition, but not the deep state that Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz will prosecute. The GOP opposed everything that Obama stood for, but they used their positions legally, the Obama admin apparently spied on the Trump campaign illegally, and that needs to be punished.
2. Trump was deeply compromised by the megatons of baggage he has accumulated as an adulterer and shady businessman in addition to what the Russians have on him. Never doubt that Putin has career ending dirt on Trump and he knows it.
3. I have difficulty responding to a statement that is entirely based on the "deep state" theory that is itself based on a mass of misrepresentation and ignorance of how things work when someone is stupidly caught up in a counter-intelligence operation. Seriously, I am fully prepared to accept that Trump is too stupid to realize even talking to Russian spies might cause him and his cronies some trouble.
1. If you think that the deep state loves Trump you haven't been paying attention. I'll add a video to #3 as a primer on WTF is happening.
Dan Bongino
2. If you're referring to Trump's sexploits with gorgeous women, no one cares, not even Melania, she knows where her bread is buttered. You want fuckedup, look at Butterbutt and his husband?! As for Trump's business dealings, his businesses were audited every year, so if there was something there it would have been found. What do the Russians have on him? Ask Mueller, its just your fantasies. No compromat, thank you.
3. We might be agreeing on the difference between talking to Russians, and a conspiracy with the Russians. Please remember that we have Hillary Clinton money actually paying for the Steel Dossier via intermediaries. That is much more of a conspiracy than anything Mueller found on Trump. Here are videos explaining the deep state theories, soon to be confirmed by Barr, Huber, Durham, and Horowitz.
Judicial Watch
President Trump and Queen Elizabeth II both addressed a state dinner at Buckingham Palace today.Obama gets standing ovation in Toronto at final NBA games
Queen gave him a book written by Churchill I believe. A wasted gift, He can't read He only tweetsPresident Trump and Queen Elizabeth II both addressed a state dinner at Buckingham Palace today.Obama gets standing ovation in Toronto at final NBA games
You think the crowds wouldn't love seeing Obama there and what reception do you think Trump would get in Toronto?President Trump and Queen Elizabeth II both addressed a state dinner at Buckingham Palace today.Obama gets standing ovation in Toronto at final NBA games
And your president bashed the mayor in England and NY A loose cannon and I'm being kindPresident Trump and Queen Elizabeth II both addressed a state dinner at Buckingham Palace today.Obama gets standing ovation in Toronto at final NBA games
Could you quote me saying anything like that? You're just pissy because you falsely claimed "3 fed rate cuts are in the works ... to ward off recession" and I called you on your LIES.Meanwhile your opinion of our economy remains the same Real strong with no sign posts up ahead ?
