Trump Wants to be investigated.

a reply to: Hippyfrog

I think you're right. Well, at least there's more truth than not to your OP. He may not necessarily want to be investigated, but since it's going to happen anyway, I do think he's making the most of it to beat them at their own game in his own inimitable way.

I was quite prepared to believe the worst about Trump... but if his critics had anything worthwhile to hold against him, they would have already. But they have nothing and they overplayed their hand to the point of ridiculousness. So they lost me -- and probably many others.

But they also opened a can of worms they can't close now and it's already biting them where the sun don't shine.

a reply to: alphabetaone

Predictable...
Tell yourself improvements are nothing to do with Trump and belittle his achievements because you don't agree with him...
all in self service to your own confirmation bias so you can repeat media talking points.

originally posted by: UKTruth

Predictable...

Your response? I agree.

Tell yourself improvements are nothing to do with Trump

No, I point to the fact that you've only been able to effectively show one accomplishment, which is hardly tantamount to your claim that he's been able to accomplish more than any other President in the last 60 years.

and belittle his achievements because you don't agree with him...

I cant belittle (which I have no desire to do) what doesn't exist.

all in self service to your own confirmation bias so you can repeat media talking points.

First of all, how would it be self-serving for me to point out that nothing is being accomplished in a country that I love?
Secondly all those "talking points" were mine, what the hell are you talking about?

a reply to: tadaman

I think your flip flops are broken. I keep hearing flop flop flop when you tip toe around the fact that this whole witch hunt is designed by the radical left and is completely, entirely unraveling.

Oz isn't real. Neither are circuses and zoos, game shows or Politics.

I mean they are real, but not really.

a reply to: alphabetaone

I can read your opinions on cnn.com.
Not much point talking further with you.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: gortex

He's not going to be vindicated.
He's going to be indicted.

You'll see.

Loretta Lynch ?
I agree

originally posted by: Hippyfrog
Then I just make them think that the investigation is about me and watch them bend over backwards to keep it live and relevant.

.

It's more like they bend over FORWARD and Trump keeps giving them the business!

a reply to: Sillyolme

Wait, so you're admitting this is a witch hunt? Color me surprised!

a reply to: alphabetaone

No they aren't.

Yes they are

Not applicable as it's not a measure of something President Trump has accomplished.

yes it is, optimism is at least in part due to him.

Yea, no other President in 60 years has accomplished that....

While your point is fine, it'll be hilarious if kennedy retires, then Trump will be the only president since George Washington to nominate two SC justices in his first year of the presidency.

Nothing has changed in NATO, so again no accomplishment.

A few attitudes have changed, but I'll give you this one.

Home builders confidence highest in a decade

I would argue that trump has had a positive effect on outlook for the economy, which has (at least in part) fueled a continuation of the uptrend.

Manufacturing job creation and hires highest in a decade.

???

It's true. And even CNN gives trump credit. you can't just put question marks and pretend it doesn't exist. Not only that but optimism in manufacturing is the highest it's been in 20 years.

Removal of tax payer funding for overseas abortions

???

Again, typing question marks doesn't make it untrue. It's true.

Illegal immigration down.

???

Once more, putting question marks doesn't make it untrue. It's true

Political groups were always privately funded lobbyists, wtf are you talking about?

Yeah, IDK what he's talking about here.

Oh and unemployment in the African American population has just reached 20 year lows.

No it hasn't

Ok, not 20 year lows, but 16.5 year lows. BLS

So UK posted 17 accomplishments, you protested 14 of them. I proved 8 of those 14 to be correct. So, if my math is right that's 11 accomplishments proven to be accurate.

I don't watch ANY media, I read and from multiple sources not just one

As I just proved, you're woefully uninformed for someone who reads so many sources... Maybe they're an echo chamber of sources parroting the same things and leaving out his accomplishments? Maybe expand your horizons.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Thanks ... Good post.

By the way, on the political groups point... It was found that Obama was using tax payer money to fund left wing activist groups with no approval by Congress. It was run through a secret DoJ slush fund under the Onama administration spending billions of dollars on activist groups, funded by money the DoJ took in from Corporate fines.

Report From March

The Obama administration funneled billions of dollars to activist organizations through a Department of Justice slush fund scheme, according to congressional investigators. “It’s clear partisan politics played a role in the illicit actions that were made,” Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, told Fox News. “The DOJ is the last place this should have occurred.” Findings spearheaded by the House Judiciary Committee point to a process shrouded in secrecy whereby monies were distributed to a labyrinth of nonprofit organizations involved with grass-roots activism.

www.foxnews.com...

..and here is the June announcement from Sessions:

“When the federal government settles a case against a corporate wrongdoer, any settlement funds should go first to the victims and then to the American people— not to bankroll third-party special interest groups or the political friends of whoever is in power,” Sessions said in a statement. “Unfortunately, in recent years the Department of Justice has sometimes required or encouraged defendants to make these payments to third parties as a condition of settlement. With this directive, we are ending this practice and ensuring that settlement funds are only used to compensate victims, redress harm, and punish and deter unlawful conduct.”

townhall.com... 7667

The DoJ have shut that practice down and referred to the practice as illegal.

I'd call adding billions back into funds to support people as progress, but the poster apparently hasn't read about the story from his "multiple sources."

In reality, the MSM have buried this - it's one of the biggest scandals of the Obama admin - dealing with corporations and giving them options for settlements if they paid political supporters of the Democrats as part of the settlement deal. Instead of continuing the practice for their own gain, the Trump admin has shut it down.

a reply to: Dfairlite

While your point is fine, it'll be hilarious if kennedy retires, then Trump will be the only president since George Washington to nominate two SC justices in his first year of the presidency.

Hypothetically nominating someone in the future is not an accomplishment. Even if he does get to nominate a new judge, that is not really his doing, is it? Even then, his nominee will need to be accepted by Congress, which is increasingly unlikely to happen. Trump has still not officially nominated a candidate for FBI director. *

What I find disturbing is the way his supporters re-frame everything to confirm their belief that he is some sort of strategic genius. When he is sitting before Congress facing impeachment, his supporters will cheer: "He finally has them where he wants them!"

*A tweet is not an official nomination and the nominee has yet to accept. Trump seems fuzzy on the way to do official business.

a reply to: DJW001

Two points:
1) Nominating people off the list is keeping one of his promises, thus the reason it's an accomplishment, but I get where you're coming from. I mean, how much work did he have to do to submit a name to congress because someone resigned or died, leaving a vacancy.

2) His nominee will be accepted easier than any other nominee in history. The dems wasted their power to stop it (only need 50 votes now) and the republicans won't waste the opportunity to stack the court with people who favor their views. If roles were reversed, the dems would do the same to the reps.

"When he is sitting before Congress facing impeachment"
And when that day never comes what will his detractors be chanting? "Impeach 45" "Resist' etc. My point is that his detractors are no better off than his supporters when it comes to blind loyalty to their team.

a reply to: Hippyfrog

Huh? Why do people think Obama got away with some crime, while thinking Trump is being unfairly accused of a crime? Oh, I know why. Because a lot of white people hate all things Obama. You want to stop being PC? Cool, let's have the real conversation that needs to be had. Just like Trump supporters not knowing the difference between the ACA and Obama-care, because his name is on it it has to go, plain and simple.

a reply to: scauma

Trump has: Facts, Paper trails, Witness testimony. VS Unnamed sources, Vitriol responses, and Obstruction.

Why even play this game with Russia collusion investigation unless it is to your advantage. If you just listen to what the intelligence agencies are telling you, you would see it is obvious. How many times do you have to hear "President Trump is not under investigation" why not ask then who is? The person who sold USA Uranium to Russia or the guy who forgot he shook someones hand at a party and exchanged pleasantries.

a reply to: Hippyfrog

hope you are correct

a reply to: UKTruth

They only care when it suits the agenda or party line. No pretense of rspect for whats best for the republic or law and order

a reply to: Hippyfrog

Trump has: Facts,

Name one.

Paper trails,

So far, Comey is the only one providing a paper trail.

Witness testimony.

The only sworn testimony does not support Trump. What alternate universe are you posting from?

a reply to: Dfairlite

2) His nominee will be accepted easier than any other nominee in history.

But... but... you can't vote on a candidate for Supreme Court Justice if there may be a change in the administration ...right?

a reply to: Boadicea

The President is sure this will go no where, and so am I. I don't know why they waste their time on things like this when they could be weeding out the real bad guys instead.

originally posted by: MidnightGoddess
a reply to: Hippyfrog

Probably because Donald Trump is Innocent.

Oh I don't think he's innocent. The whole Russia thing is probably nonsense but something definitely doesn't pass the smell test with everything that's been going on for the past couple decades or so. Something is up and Trump is definitely part of it. We'll probably never know the truth though so I guess it's kind of a waste of time to even try to figure it out.