I think it is now plausible that Trump will face an indictment, if so, I think the prosecution should go ahead and file the indictment and leave it to the courts to answer the question of whether a sitting President can be indicted

[WuWei]

@Orygun

I just disagree. The Dems shook off Edwards pretty quick. They certainly shook off Al Franken. I really believe that if Obama was caught up in this much scandal he would have resigned- or been forced out by party leaders. This is a singularly abnormal election cycle where all the sane rules don’t apply.

51% of the population is female. Franken will be back.

[peek-a-boo]

@MidwestIndy

There it is!! Wouldn’t be a hannity thread with you coming in an posting this at least once.
Its almost as if you think you saying that doesn’t make another posters content correct or relevant. It’s really just what you do when you’ve admitted defeat. Seems to happen alot.

Continuing to claim that Levin is just another two bit lawyer is a LW talking point. It is completely false, which any objective observe would clearly be able to see for themselves.

[peek-a-boo]

@Keyser_Soze

In fact, his Wiki entry indicates that he simply has a JD and it does not appear that he took and passed the bar in any state

Yep! he’s just a flunkey. Two bit nobody. You LIBs are just so darned smart. We can’t put anything over on you.

[dantes]

This is why “appeal to authority” is a terrible argument strategy. It’s no longer about the issue and is more about who is and isn’t an authority.

Bad debate tactics. I would consider attempting to avoid it.

Not trying to coerce you into doing anything. Not demanding you do anything. Just offering my personal opinion.

[reflechissez]

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@NebraskaFootball

@zantax

That commentary was baked in when he won the primary.

I disagree. He won the primary with a plurality, not a majority. His support among the Republican base has only grown stronger since then, and in spite of these egregious realities we have suffered and been forced to endure from him. I never in a million years would have believed the base of my former party to be as delusional and detached from reality and morality as they are proving themselves to be today. It is a sad fall from grace in my opinion.

His support from an ever-shrinking group.

Yeah, he’s lost a whopping three points from all since the day he was sworn in. I am not sure he has lost any from Republican voters but I’ll have to check.

The number of registered republicans has dropped a lot.

And has been dropping for a long time, doesn’t mean they don’t vote republican.

I think you missed the point.

[peek-a-boo]

@MidwestIndy

LW Talking Points!!! LW Talking Points!!! LW Talking Points!!!

Denigrate!!! Denigrate!!! Denigrate!!!

Lib!! Lib! Lib!

Frothy froth; froth. We can’t forget that one.

[dantes]

I can’t stand Jim Sterling.

Levin is so into the theatrical aspect of his performance, I don’t know how anyone would take him seriously. He’ll start speaking all soft and then launch immediately into a screaming tirade.

[MidwestIndy]

@peek-a-boo

Continuing to claim that Levin is just another two bit lawyer is a LW talking point. It is completely false, which any objective observe would clearly be able to see for themselves.

He is just another lawyer. He is certainly no expert. He has no higher qualifications than any other law school graduate. Could you show otherwise?

[Illegal_Alien]

Seriously I stopped as well because Giuliani is not a good source to rest your information on.

[peek-a-boo]

@Plasmaball

No…I’m just telling you the reality of the situation. Once we remove your partisan bias it becomes clear you dont know ■■■■ about ■■■■.

Hence why you focused on that little snip of my post. You have nothing.

You got your response…I’m done with you in this thread

Thank God for small miracles.

[peek-a-boo]

@MidwestIndy

He is just another lawyer. He is certainly no expert. He has no higher qualifications than any other law school graduate. Could you show otherwise?

Why bother? Nothing will shake you from your talking points.

[zantax]

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@NebraskaFootball

@zantax

Democrats are no better, it would have taken a hell of a thing to force them to unseat Obama. For the same reason, doing so for anything short of earth shaking would have crippled their party for years to come. Republicans got weary of being the only ones playing by the rules.

It’s a hypothetical that we will never know the answer to. But I don’t buy for a second that Democrats would have stood idly by and allow Obama to act or say even a fraction of what the GOP turns a blind eye to with Trump. I wouldn’t have thought the GOP would either, of not seeing it happen before our eyes.

Hilarious, he literally got away with murdering American citizens without due process.

They were Muslims. Republicans don’t care about Muslims. They held the house and the senate. Why didn’t they do anything about it?

Why are you asking me when you answered your own question? They obviously felt the constitution doesn’t apply to American citizens who join Isis, I disagree with them.

You said: “Democrats are no better”, yet the republicans controlled the house. You people had 8/9 Benghazi investigations, but not one investigation into his “murdering American citizens without due process.” Why is that?

Could have sworn I just told you, elected republicans and many of the people in the party don’t think the constitution is applicable to Americans who join ISIS. Apparently neither do democrats, though I suspect their view has a lot more to do with which President kills them without due process then their allegiance to ISIS. Because they certainly seemed to think even foreign members of ISIS were entitled to due process when George Bush was President.

[MidwestIndy]

@peek-a-boo

Why bother.

No one forced you to reply, your ego does.

[Illegal_Alien]

I would think in a court of law he could be defined as an Expert. Given his credentials and Education:

You may not like him or his conclusions on subjects but he is somewhat an expert:

Temple University Ambler and graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa with a B.A.in Political Science in 1977 at age 19

In 1980, Levin earned a [J.D.]
(Juris Doctor - Wikipedia) from Temple University Beasley School of Law.[

Beginning in 1981, at age 24, Levin served as an adviser to several members of President Ronald Reagan’s cabinet, eventually becoming the associate director of presidential personnel and ultimately chief of staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese; Levin also served as deputy assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education at the U.S. Department of Education, and deputy solicitor of the U.S. Department of the Interior.[15] He practiced law in the private sector and is president of Landmark Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm founded in 1976 with offices in Kansas City, Missouri and Leesburg, Virginia.[16][17][18]

Source:

Mark Levin

[conan]

@TheDoctorIsIn

One does not need to be an “expert” to have an informed opinion.

Didn’t you say last night that it’s people job to know the laws?

[MidwestIndy]

@Illegal_Alien

I would think in a court of law he could be defined as an Expert. Given his credentials and Education:

You may not like him or his conclusions on subjects but he is somewhat an expert:

That would be up to the judge. But there are hundreds of thousands of people just in this country who have the same if not higher credentials than him .

[reflechissez]

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@NebraskaFootball

@zantax

Democrats are no better, it would have taken a hell of a thing to force them to unseat Obama. For the same reason, doing so for anything short of earth shaking would have crippled their party for years to come. Republicans got weary of being the only ones playing by the rules.

It’s a hypothetical that we will never know the answer to. But I don’t buy for a second that Democrats would have stood idly by and allow Obama to act or say even a fraction of what the GOP turns a blind eye to with Trump. I wouldn’t have thought the GOP would either, of not seeing it happen before our eyes.

Hilarious, he literally got away with murdering American citizens without due process.

They were Muslims. Republicans don’t care about Muslims. They held the house and the senate. Why didn’t they do anything about it?

Why are you asking me when you answered your own question? They obviously felt the constitution doesn’t apply to American citizens who join Isis, I disagree with them.

You said: “Democrats are no better”, yet the republicans controlled the house. You people had 8/9 Benghazi investigations, but not one investigation into his “murdering American citizens without due process.” Why is that?

Could have sworn I just told you, elected republicans and many of the people in the party don’t think the constitution is applicable to Americans who join ISIS. Apparently neither do democrats, though I suspect their view has a lot more to do with which President kills them without due process then their allegiance to ISIS. Because they certainly seemed to think even foreign members of ISIS were entitled to due process when George Bush was President.

You keep trying to lay blame on the democrats for something the republicans could have done but didn’t.

[zantax]

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@NebraskaFootball

@zantax

Democrats are no better, it would have taken a hell of a thing to force them to unseat Obama. For the same reason, doing so for anything short of earth shaking would have crippled their party for years to come. Republicans got weary of being the only ones playing by the rules.

It’s a hypothetical that we will never know the answer to. But I don’t buy for a second that Democrats would have stood idly by and allow Obama to act or say even a fraction of what the GOP turns a blind eye to with Trump. I wouldn’t have thought the GOP would either, of not seeing it happen before our eyes.

Hilarious, he literally got away with murdering American citizens without due process.

They were Muslims. Republicans don’t care about Muslims. They held the house and the senate. Why didn’t they do anything about it?

Why are you asking me when you answered your own question? They obviously felt the constitution doesn’t apply to American citizens who join Isis, I disagree with them.

You said: “Democrats are no better”, yet the republicans controlled the house. You people had 8/9 Benghazi investigations, but not one investigation into his “murdering American citizens without due process.” Why is that?

Could have sworn I just told you, elected republicans and many of the people in the party don’t think the constitution is applicable to Americans who join ISIS. Apparently neither do democrats, though I suspect their view has a lot more to do with which President kills them without due process then their allegiance to ISIS. Because they certainly seemed to think even foreign members of ISIS were entitled to due process when George Bush was President.

You keep trying to lay blame on the democrats for something the republicans could have done but didn’t.

So democrats wanted to impeach him for it but couldn’t? Is that really your claim?

[reflechissez]

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@NebraskaFootball

@zantax

Democrats are no better, it would have taken a hell of a thing to force them to unseat Obama. For the same reason, doing so for anything short of earth shaking would have crippled their party for years to come. Republicans got weary of being the only ones playing by the rules.

It’s a hypothetical that we will never know the answer to. But I don’t buy for a second that Democrats would have stood idly by and allow Obama to act or say even a fraction of what the GOP turns a blind eye to with Trump. I wouldn’t have thought the GOP would either, of not seeing it happen before our eyes.

Hilarious, he literally got away with murdering American citizens without due process.

They were Muslims. Republicans don’t care about Muslims. They held the house and the senate. Why didn’t they do anything about it?

Why are you asking me when you answered your own question? They obviously felt the constitution doesn’t apply to American citizens who join Isis, I disagree with them.

You said: “Democrats are no better”, yet the republicans controlled the house. You people had 8/9 Benghazi investigations, but not one investigation into his “murdering American citizens without due process.” Why is that?

Could have sworn I just told you, elected republicans and many of the people in the party don’t think the constitution is applicable to Americans who join ISIS. Apparently neither do democrats, though I suspect their view has a lot more to do with which President kills them without due process then their allegiance to ISIS. Because they certainly seemed to think even foreign members of ISIS were entitled to due process when George Bush was President.

You keep trying to lay blame on the democrats for something the republicans could have done but didn’t.

So democrats wanted to impeach him for it but couldn’t? Is that really your claim?

No, that’s your claim.

[zantax]

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@reflechissez

@zantax

@NebraskaFootball

@zantax

Democrats are no better, it would have taken a hell of a thing to force them to unseat Obama. For the same reason, doing so for anything short of earth shaking would have crippled their party for years to come. Republicans got weary of being the only ones playing by the rules.

It’s a hypothetical that we will never know the answer to. But I don’t buy for a second that Democrats would have stood idly by and allow Obama to act or say even a fraction of what the GOP turns a blind eye to with Trump. I wouldn’t have thought the GOP would either, of not seeing it happen before our eyes.

Hilarious, he literally got away with murdering American citizens without due process.

They were Muslims. Republicans don’t care about Muslims. They held the house and the senate. Why didn’t they do anything about it?

Why are you asking me when you answered your own question? They obviously felt the constitution doesn’t apply to American citizens who join Isis, I disagree with them.

You said: “Democrats are no better”, yet the republicans controlled the house. You people had 8/9 Benghazi investigations, but not one investigation into his “murdering American citizens without due process.” Why is that?

Could have sworn I just told you, elected republicans and many of the people in the party don’t think the constitution is applicable to Americans who join ISIS. Apparently neither do democrats, though I suspect their view has a lot more to do with which President kills them without due process then their allegiance to ISIS. Because they certainly seemed to think even foreign members of ISIS were entitled to due process when George Bush was President.

You keep trying to lay blame on the democrats for something the republicans could have done but didn’t.

So democrats wanted to impeach him for it but couldn’t? Is that really your claim?

No, that’s your claim.

No, it’s directly opposed to my claim.