Never forget the real scandal here: The world’s most powerful law enforcement/intelligence apparatus was weaponized to sabotage a rival presidential campaign & then to try to oust the duly elected president of the U.S. Everything else is just noise.

Yes but they can't be very powerful, they didn't succeed

The real threat is Russia helped the dufus, and he wants them to help him again, and why wouldn't they? It worked so well before.

Quote:

---

The real threat is Russia helped the dufus, and he wants them to help him again, and why wouldn't they? It worked so well before.

---

Mr. Mueller disagreed with you.

Why would they want Trump. He has done more than any President since Reagan to stall Russian ambitions . What we need is another Church Committee type of Congressional investigation looking into the FBI and CIA behavior .The Church committee looked into civil rights abuses by the intelligence ,law enforcement ,and national security agencies . We know that this originated at the top levels of the agencies and there was little involvement in the rank and file of the agencies . We also know how the MSM colluded to report leaked information by the leaders of the agencies for the purpose of providing these agencies with secondary confirmation of the misinformation these agencies were peddling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Mr. Mueller disagreed with you.

---

According to his report, Russia worked on many levels against Hillary and for the dufus, and Vlad admitted he favored the dufus as prez in Helsinki. Not sure what you were reading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Why would they want Trump. He has done more than any President since Reagan to stall Russian ambitions . What we need is another Church Committee type of Congressional investigation looking into the FBI and CIA behavior .The Church committee looked into civil rights abuses by the intelligence ,law enforcement ,and national security agencies . We know that this originated at the top levels of the agencies and there was little involvement in the rank and file of the agencies . We also know how the MSM colluded to report leaked information by the leaders of the agencies for the purpose of providing these agencies with secondary confirmation of the misinformation these agencies were peddling.

---

Has he? The dufus hasn't taken on inch of ground from Vlad, and has seceded Syria to the Russian/Iranian coalition. We can argue about your conspiracy theory, about misinformation, and that fake news meme the dufus spouts, but until you get to a court or OFFICIAL investigation the dufus and you have squat. Less than you had on Hillary for sure.

I think the theme of "I was robbed" has become old and tired, Hilliary was not robbed, certainly not by any small influence the Russians might have been able to exert. What won for Trump was a neglected electorate and an antiquated system of selecting a President.

Quote:

---

What won for Trump was a neglected electorate and an antiquated system of selecting a President.

---

Another reason is distrust of people and parties who hold power for too long.

There are very good explanations for why voters rarely choose a president from the same party for three consecutive terms. You would have to go all the way back to 1836 to find a Democrat being elected to succeed afrom the same party (excluding Franklin Delano Roosevelt)...it was over before it began. Hillary and Obama lost because they were being ignant...too many mistakes made through being overconfident.

When I heard Obama snidely speak "Donald Trump will not be President"...(why would he say that?) it could only mean one thing, Trump would be President. It was as if he set himself (Hillary) up for failure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waltero

Another reason is distrust of people and parties who hold power for too long.

There are very good explanations for why voters rarely choose a president from the same party for three consecutive terms. You would have to go all the way back to 1836 to find a Democrat being elected to succeed afrom the same party (excluding Franklin Delano Roosevelt)...it was over before it began. Hillary and Obama lost because they were being ignant...too many mistakes made through being overconfident.

---

Yes, eight years is long enough for any party to lose momentum. Their program has been largely implemented by then and if not, it isn't going to happen. Mistakes have become very apparent in that time

I think Trump won because HC was such a weak candidate.

I think Waltero makes a great point as the incumbent party rarely gets a third consecutive term as president, Bush senior being my only recollection and he got dumped after one term. Social media has greatly changed the game though, and made us exploitable, and gives EVERYBODY a way to coalesce around new ideas and concept. Works the same way for the dastardly as the good guys.

Looking forward to the next vote.

Quote:

---

Works the same way for the dastardly as the good guys.

---

There are good guys??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

There are good guys??

---

You're a good guy... aren't you? I think so, despite our differences of opinion and candidate choices.

Quote:

---

You're a good guy... aren't you? I think so, despite our differences of opinion and candidate choices.

---

I feel the same way about you. As to pres candidates, I don't know of anyone I would refer to as having good character in either party other than Dr. Ben Carson, but he is not a candidate this time around.

LOL, I'm comfortable with Biden, Warren, Harris, and Kobashar, but Carson is a fish out of water that just doesn't impress me. Even the highly popular Saunders hasn't shown the pragmatism I favor to implement a reasonable plan in my estimation. I share his ideas, but the devil is in the details.

Well, if you are just looking at policies and not so much character, I'll stick with Trump. Kind of a low character guy, but then so were (in my view) HC and Obama. But he has hit on 2 of my three key issues. 1. healthy economy 2. nominate SC judges who believe in the Constitution. 3. balance the budget.

He has blown it on #3, which is huge, but then Obama went 0/3 and HC was too connected with his policies for me to consider.

Quote:

---

I think the theme of "I was robbed" has become old and tired, Hilliary was not robbed, certainly not by any small influence the Russians might have been able to exert. What won for Trump was a neglected electorate and an antiquated system of selecting a President.

---

agree except there is nothing antiquated in the way we select the President .

I don't have the same bias against liberal judges versus conservative ones as you do, but the dirty trick by Slick Mitch bummed me out, even though I have nothing against Gorsuch at all. Every time I review some of these picks being pushed through now though, I cringe, as well as the fed picks and the cabinets. Too many scandals for me followed by resignations to avoid investigations. I worry when you let big corporations police themselves and a congress too dumb to even know what they're doing.

I tend to think long term strategy that quick fixes that can bite you later. I mean good grief we handled the Ebola and Zika outbreaks and we can't get a handle on Measles? Something is very wrong here lately.

Quote:

---

agree except there is nothing antiquated in the way we select the President .

---

Exactly correct.

Quote:

---

a congress too dumb to even know what they're doing.

---

I would tend to agree with that, even though I must point out the congress is controlled by democrats.

Explain the factual accuracy of that last line please.