Great opening on Tucker as always. He grill democratic Congressman Brad Sherman. A microcosm os the obstructionist dems.
Trump Has A Mandate
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
- Status
How can the Democrats be blamed for being "obstructionists" - the Republicans are in the majority in both the House and Senate.
Other than the debt ceiling, this President, Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell have made no effort to consult with the Democrats on proposed legislation over the last 9 months!
One of the reasons that Senator McCain gave for voting against the Republican healthcare bill was that the leadership attempted to rush the legislation through - without no attempt to follow regular procedures (committees, hearings, consulting with stakeholders).
Given that Republicans are now making all the same mistakes with tax reform that they made with healthcare, conservatives like "patrick jane" will be all too willing to accuse the Democrats of "obstructionism" if they fail!
Last edited:
I try to lead a life where I don't have to ask God for forgiveness ...
Why do I have to repent?
Why do I have to ask for forgiveness if you're not making mistakes?
- Donald Trump (CNN 7/22/2016)
1 John 1:10 - If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.
What kind of a relationship could this President possibly have with God, given that he makes no mistakes (none that he'll admit to) and therefore has no need to repent and ask forgiveness?
In effect, this President has rejected that Christ died on the Cross for our sins, including those of Donald Trump!
That alone should be triggering off the warning bells for every Christian - by claiming that he has not sinned, Donald Trump has not only rejected Christ's sacrifice, made Christ out to be a liar, but has also attributed to himself the status of a "deity!"
JG, what part of "you're attempting to reason with Trump supporters" is not yet clear to you? :chuckle:
Try to remember that Trump is merely the latest face of the double-standard hypocrisy those within the so called "Religious Right" had always lived by, way before he came along.
Such have ever gloried in their shame.
Thus their ever glorying in their ignorance; in their name-calling and mud-slinging; and putting up of images of Kleenex boxes and the rest - they glory in their shame as if stepping on someone one foolishly perceives one has somehow won some cheap victory over, is somehow the mark of a Believer.
Note how that also describes the very traits their false idol is so very well known for to this very minute.
Its stands to reason his hypocrisy resonates with them, bro.
You wanna know what a culture bedazzled by an anti-Christ will look like - look no further than the Trump supporter.
Remember, even he found he could do no wrong before the eyes of such.
You very well know, he got a huge kick out of that; out of this conceit of his confirmed to him by said fools.
For that kind of spiritual corruption works both ways - note the description of such pew warmers - for the following is actually about the height of an apostasy by false believers...
2 Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
One has no hope of reasoning with such.
None.
Trump is merely the latest representation of that kind of a self-delusion: merely a very bright orange representation of the height of the self-deception of such.
They love not the truth they claim to.
It is what it is.
One more proof that Romans 5:8 was needed.
:rotfl: I'm getting a kick out your obsession.
The left/dems are squirming now, they can't sleep and they need more MSM medicine. A few of them come to TOL for their medicine. It helps them to type about Trump and defend the corrupt dems.
glorydaz
Well-known member
We should have a thread dedicated specifically to their venting, don't you think? :think:
While Democrats claim that Republicans are hypocrites for failing to sound off loudly enough against President Trump’s alleged “obstruction of justice,” some top Democrats have gone completely silent on what looks exactly like obstruction of justice by Obama attorney general Loretta Lynch. During his testimony on Capitol Hill last week, former FBI director James Comey stated that Lynch told him she wanted him to treat his “investigation” into Hillary Clinton as a “matter” instead; Comey testified that made him feel “queasy.” Not queasy enough to reveal that information, of course, and not queasy enough to reject her order. But queasy.
Obstruction of justice is defined most broadly under 18 USC 1503 as “corruptly or … by any threatening letter or communication influenc[ing], or imped[ing] or endeavor[ing[ to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice.” This provision doesn’t cover congressional or administrative proceedings, but it would cover criminal investigations. It would be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lynch participated in obstruction, since she could claim that there was no pending judicial proceeding — and Comey’s decision to essentially let Lynch off the hook by exonerating Hillary himself gives her cover for that decision. But there is no question that Lynch’s interference into the Hillary matter should raise hackles.
Yet Democrats like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is already preparing to give Lynch the benefit of the doubt. While Schumer says that Trump’s comments to Comey regarding Mike Flynn must be treated with the highest level of scrutiny — “He’s the President of the United States, he’s got to step up to the plate” — the far more legally knowledgeable Lynch gets a pass. “All I am saying with Loretta Lynch,” Schumer explained, “is before anyone jumps to any conclusions, we ought to hear what she has to say and let her state something privately and see if it makes much of a difference. I don’t know that it will.”
The point here isn’t that Lynch could be convicted of obstruction. But while Democrats chide Republicans for their willingness to ignore supposed obstruction by Trump, they’re ignoring activity at least as nefarious from Lynch — and Comey. Because here’s the problem. If Lynch’s defense to obstruction is that there was no pending proceeding thanks to Comey, and Comey has said he felt pressure from Lynch to change his practice on the case and then dumped the proceeding, isn’t that at least as bad as what happened with Trump? Wouldn’t that impact Comey’s credibility as a strong, upright fellow if he caved to please Lynch and then carried water for Trump until he was fired?
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17409/democrats-hypocrisy-loretta-lynchs-election-ben-shapiro#
Obstruction of justice is defined most broadly under 18 USC 1503 as “corruptly or … by any threatening letter or communication influenc[ing], or imped[ing] or endeavor[ing[ to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice.” This provision doesn’t cover congressional or administrative proceedings, but it would cover criminal investigations. It would be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lynch participated in obstruction, since she could claim that there was no pending judicial proceeding — and Comey’s decision to essentially let Lynch off the hook by exonerating Hillary himself gives her cover for that decision. But there is no question that Lynch’s interference into the Hillary matter should raise hackles.
Yet Democrats like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is already preparing to give Lynch the benefit of the doubt. While Schumer says that Trump’s comments to Comey regarding Mike Flynn must be treated with the highest level of scrutiny — “He’s the President of the United States, he’s got to step up to the plate” — the far more legally knowledgeable Lynch gets a pass. “All I am saying with Loretta Lynch,” Schumer explained, “is before anyone jumps to any conclusions, we ought to hear what she has to say and let her state something privately and see if it makes much of a difference. I don’t know that it will.”
The point here isn’t that Lynch could be convicted of obstruction. But while Democrats chide Republicans for their willingness to ignore supposed obstruction by Trump, they’re ignoring activity at least as nefarious from Lynch — and Comey. Because here’s the problem. If Lynch’s defense to obstruction is that there was no pending proceeding thanks to Comey, and Comey has said he felt pressure from Lynch to change his practice on the case and then dumped the proceeding, isn’t that at least as bad as what happened with Trump? Wouldn’t that impact Comey’s credibility as a strong, upright fellow if he caved to please Lynch and then carried water for Trump until he was fired?
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17409/democrats-hypocrisy-loretta-lynchs-election-ben-shapiro#
He's a gullible pawn of the left.
Are they still crying about Hillary being a loser?
"Anti-Trump protesters are becoming impossible to parody. In just a few short weeks, on November 8, thousands of Americans in at least nine cities will take to the streets to “scream helplessly at the sky.” You can probably guess the reason: It’s to mark the one-year anniversary of the election of Donald Trump. Can you believe it’s almost been a year since the election? Time flies when everyone seems to be losing their minds! Here’s the good news: If you’re reading this, you’re still alive. You’re not hunkered down in some bunker in South Dakota. The stock market seems downright giddy — knock on wood, at least for now — and despite our president’s occasionally baffling and sometimes alarming tweets, our country is apparently still free enough for people to get on Facebook and organize cross-country protests that involve shouting at clouds. In New York alone, 2,300 people have signed up to scream helplessly at the sky, and 15,000 more have expressed interest. Personally, I have never screamed at the sky, shaken my fist at the sun, or berated any other random celestial object. I didn’t even watch the eclipse! But this is America, and people can still do pretty much what they want to do, even if it’s a half-baked protest that I guarantee will become really awkward the moment after everyone walks outside and screams for ten seconds and then looks around in a gigantic, unspoken “Okay, now what?” (Maybe some of the better protests will organize a live band and some hot-dog trucks to offset all of the screaming, but somehow, I doubt it.) For many Democrats, left-of-center voters, and even Republican opponents of Donald Trump, “Okay, now what?” is truly the question of our times. Johanna Schulman, the organizer of the original Boston “scream helplessly at the sky” protest — it has now been canceled, she says, due to “circumstances beyond our control” — told the press that “coming together reminds us that we are not alone, that we are part of an enormous community of activists who are motivated and angry, whose actions can make a difference.”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453175/anti-trumpers-screaming-sky-prove-america-still-free
Trump told China a thing or two.
Profanity Warning
Meanwhile, Trump's approval index stands at -21, according to Rasmussen.
Strongly Approve: 27%
Strongly Disapprove: 48%
Total Approve: 43%
Total Disapprove: 56%
Continuing Trump's mandate to serve one term.
Strongly Approve: 27%
Strongly Disapprove: 48%
Total Approve: 43%
Total Disapprove: 56%
Continuing Trump's mandate to serve one term.
Hopefully (should common sense and love of country prevail), he won't make it through a whole term.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
That "strongly approve" 27% probably isn't going to change much. That's Trump's base, they're who he panders to in his tweets, and they're staying loyal.
Like this couple:
I asked Schilling what would happen if the next three years go the way the past one has.
“I’m not going to blame him,” Schilling said. “Absolutely not.”
Is there anything that could change her mind about Trump?
“Nope,” she said.
All this, perhaps, is not so surprising, considering polling continues to show that—in spite of unprecedented unpopularity—nearly all people who voted for Trump would do it again. But as I compared this year’s answers to last year’s responses it seemed clear that the basis of people’s support had morphed. Johnstown voters do not intend to hold the president accountable for the nonnegotiable pledges he made to them. It’s not that the people who made Trump president have generously moved the goalposts for him. It’s that they have eliminated the goalposts altogether.
This reality ought to get the attention of anyone who thinks they will win in 2018 or 2020 by running against Trump’s record. His supporters here, it turns out, are energized by his bombast and his animus more than any actual accomplishments. For them, it’s evidently not what he’s doing so much as it is the people he’s fighting. Trump is simply and unceasingly angry on their behalf, battling the people who vex them the worst—“obstructionist” Democrats, uncooperative establishment Republicans, the media, Black Lives Matter protesters and NFL players (boy oh boy do they hate kneeling NFL players) whom they see as ungrateful, disrespectful millionaires.
And they love him for this. . . .
Indeed ... which makes them primarily responsible for any attacks that happens to America under his wanna-be dictatorship.
- Status