Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
lol - the whole "Russia Russia Russia" thing didn't work so the OP is pivoting to the "German German German" meme.
You can't make this "stuff" up
Trump's presidency, even if he does nothing (which is not true because he has done a lot already) was completely worth it just for exposing the Left for what they are: power hungry, intolerant of opposing viewpoints, and willing to scorch earth just to smear and oppose Trump / Republicans.
After multiple bankruptcies, bank lenders didn't want to touch Trump, they had a nick name for him....'The King of Debt'.
Judging by our skyrocketing fiscal deficits, he sure is living up to that nick name.
Trumps was never a Billionaire. That was just the workings of his ego. If you remember years back. To get on Forbes 400 list of most richest. Trump pulled this stunt.
" While working on the Forbes 400 in May 1984, the reporter says that Trump contacted him claiming to be an aide named John Barron. In 2016, The Washington Post revealed that Barron was actually Trump himself and that he often used the name to pretend to be his own spokesperson. During the call, Trump as Barron said that he had taken control of the business he ran with his father, and should be credited with owning those assets as well, which would make him a billionaire. Under a previous editor of the Forbes 400 list, the magazine had valued Trump’s assets at $200 million, only a fifth of what he claimed to own in interviews."
The real good part. He used the name Barron, the name of his yet to be born son to try this stunt. You cant make this chit up. That's your true Hero at work.
SDNY is digging DEEPLY into Trump's shady history with Deutsche Bank.
Trump said investigating his personal finances would be a "red line." Why? If there's no illegalities there, why would Trump be against being vindicated? Wouldn't an innocent man welcome baseless investigations that only prove him innocent and make biased dems look stupid?
The New York Times, along with the most of the MSM, is now thoroughly discredited and disgraced over Russiagate. How many topics did you post here by them that started out as being untrue?
Got any proof of any of this that ISN'T their "opinion"?
Otherwise, thinking America knows that it's all untrue.
They are only discredited by "the enemy of the people" slogan that the radical right tries to portray. But remember that's not their target audience anyway. It never will be. But Breitbart and State TV Fox News are big business for the boogeyman agenda. No exoneration on obstruction. Release and review.
Last edited by KayAnn246; 03-26-2019 at 05:29 PM..
SDNY is digging DEEPLY into Trump's shady history with Deutsche Bank.
Trump said investigating his personal finances would be a "red line." Why? If there's no illegalities there, why would Trump be against being vindicated? Wouldn't an innocent man welcome baseless investigations that only prove him innocent and make biased dems look stupid?
Innocent people don’t want to be investigated because they are innocent. Why does he need to be proven innocent, can they even come up with enough probable cause to warrant what they are doing? What specific crime do they suspect him of committing in reference to the bank, or are we just looking for something, anything?
Last edited by CaseyB; 03-27-2019 at 05:57 AM..
Reason: rude
Uh-Oh. Mueller closed up shop. Time to change the narrative.
Again.
Actually, this bank issue will probably not be going away. This was not the subject of Mueller's investigation other than to check on money laundering for the Russians, which has not been disproved.
The Trump Org financial crimes will continue to be investigated by the various jurisdictions in which the criminal activity took place.
Do you know how dumb you sound. Innocent people don’t want to be investigated because they are innocent. Why does he need to be proven innocent, can they even come up with enough probable cause to warrant what they are doing? What specific crime do they suspect him of committing in reference to the bank, or are we just looking for something, anything?
The Trump Organization is not "innocent people."
Donald Trump has not proven anything other than he did not consciously collude with Russia. He was not innocent of Obstruction, and there are all kinds of financial crimes that have been handed off to various jurisdictions.
He paid off a a porn star while sitting in the Oval Office. He wrote a check at that desk. To a porn star to please keep quiet so that nobody knew anything before they voted for him. One can only imagine what may have happened if Obama had paid off a porn star with hush money WHILE IN OFFICE. You think that is 'legal'?
Trump going around bragging and claiming he was exonerated is not really any different than Jussie Smollet announcing he was exonerated, is it?
Declining to prosecute is not equal to innocent. Come back when the entire report is released.
Donald Trump has not proven anything other than he did not consciously collude with Russia. He was not innocent of Obstruction, and there are all kinds of financial crimes that have been handed off to various jurisdictions.
He paid off a a porn star while sitting in the Oval Office. He wrote a check at that desk. To a porn star to please keep quiet so that nobody knew anything before they voted for him. One can only imagine what may have happened if Obama had paid off a porn star with hush money WHILE IN OFFICE. You think that is 'legal'?
Trump going around bragging and claiming he was exonerated is not really any different than Jussie Smollet announcing he was exonerated, is it?
Declining to prosecute is not equal to innocent. Come back when the entire report is released.
psss.... no one cares but a group of delusional butt hurt progressive nitwits...
Do you know how dumb you sound. Innocent people don’t want to be investigated because they are innocent. Why does he need to be proven innocent
Uh, because about 60% of the electorate think he's not???
Do you know how dumb you sound?
Your "innocent people don't want to be investigated because they are innocent" might be true of some regular Joe who doesn't want an IRS audit because it's a big frickin' hassle. However that same regular Joe, if he was being a investigated for a crime (say embezzlement) and his public reputation was on the line? You can damn well bet he'd welcome an investigation if he were innocent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
