Trump and the anthem

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by zerodark13

Can the President Be Indicted? A Long-Hidden Legal Memo Says Yes - https://nytimes.com/2017/07/22/us/po...tarr-memo.html

Your move, princess.

Very good, orangelicker! I'm impressed that you dug that up.

Funny how the New York Times didn't try to shine a spotlight on this never-used 1998 Ken Starr internal memo back when Slick Willy the Perjuring Sexual Predator was still in office. Maybe they were too busy waiting for Slick Willy's own Office of Legal Counsel to issue their 2000 opinion stating as follows:

"In 1973, the Department (of Justice) concluded that the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions... We believe that the conclusion reached by the Department in 1973 still represents the best interpretation of the Constitution."

Of course, Ken Starr never acted on his 1998 internal memo - the one that the NYT is now treating so respectfully. It was a potential position paper whose arguments were never tested. As the Times notes, Starr ended up taking the "more prudent and appropriate course" of referring the results of his investigation "to Congress for potential impeachment."

So it looks like Ken Starr recognized how weak the memo's arguments were. Especially the one claiming “If the framers of our Constitution wanted to create a special immunity for the president, they could have written the relevant clause.” They DID write the relevant clause - it's called impeachment!

Your NYT story goes on to note that Mueller would be violating DOJ "policies and practices" if he tried to indict Trump (assuming he had evidence of criminal wrongdoing) despite the 2000 opinion of the Department's own Office of Legal Counsel saying it was impermissible under the Constitution.

Good effort, orangesucker... close, but no cigar! Slick Willy smoked 'em all.

[zerodark13]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Very good, orangesucker! I'm impressed that you dug that up.

Yes, I “dug up” an article freely available on the internet posted by one of the largest news organizations on the planet. So much digging! Took four seconds.

Just curious, is calling me “orangelicker” and “orangesucker” really the best you’ve got? It implies that I support Trump, when you’re the actual orange licker/sucker here. Are you that dim? Wait, you live in Pittsburgh, and you’re arguing in favor of a criminal on an escort message board for Austin, Texas. I don’t even need to ask how dim you are when you prove it with every post.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by zerodark13

Just curious, is calling me “orangelicker” and “orangesucker” really the best you’ve got? It implies that I support Trump, when you’re the actual orange licker/sucker here.

Now, now... don't get so hysterical, zerodick. I was merely acknowledging your constant pining for an "orange boyfriend". Forget about Trumpy and show us you know a little bit about upholding the Constitution. Upon careful reading, your NYT story doesn't say what you want it to.

[zerodark13]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Now, now... don't get hysterical, zerodick. I was merely acknowledging your constant pining for an "orange boyfriend". Forget about Trumpy and show us you know a little bit about upholding the Constitution. Upon careful reading, your NYT story doesn't say what you want it to.

Yup, more proof. Keep it coming, princess.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by zerodark13

Yup, more proof.

Proof of your inability to debate or your ignorance of the Constitution? Or both?

Go stand in the corner with millsy.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Austin Dude

Yet you never hear what all these white men killing innocent children. You know like with Sandy Hook, or in Vegas, or at a church in Texas...

Are you really this stupid?

Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs - The media can't get enough of those tragedies. They cover them 24/7, especially when they can exploit them to push their anti-2nd amendment narratives!

Think before you post, millsy.

[zerodark13]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Proof of your inability to debate or your ignorance of the Constitution? Or both?

Go stand in the corner with millsy.

Cool cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias, bro. More proof, princess. Is that another Pennsylvania fetish, enjoying having your idiocy put on display for the amusement of others? Nope, you definitely learned it from your orange turd-king.

[lustylad]

So you hide behind a shoddy New York Times article and offer no comments of your own other than "your move, princess"... then when the article is picked apart and it becomes your move again, you turn into a blathering fool who has nothing but insults?

Look - I'm sure there are many fine, intelligent, well-bred and articulate folks in Austin who relish a good debate and know how our Constitution works. You're obviously not one of them.

[zerodark13]

Originally Posted by lustylad

So you hide behind a shoddy New York Times article and offer no comments of your own other than "your move, princess"... then when the article is picked apart and it becomes your move again, you turn into a blathering fool who has nothing but insults?

Look - I'm sure there are many fine, intelligent, well-bred and articulate folks in Austin who relish a good debate and know how our Constitution works. You're obviously not one of them.

You’ve picked noting apart, you simple dolt. What I find particularly hilarious is that the man who tried to take down Clinton (and failed, miserably) will be responsible for taking down your orange turd-god.

You’re the one who started throwing insults. You’re like a monkey at the zoo throwing shit who gets mad when somebody throws shit back at them. You have no concept of actual facts, the law, or indeed anything you’re posting about, which is great, because every time you post something, it just reinforces the fact that you’re a complete blathering idiot.

Keep fucking that chicken, sweetie.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Originally Posted by lustylad

So you hide behind a shoddy New York Times article...

Originally Posted by zerodark13

Yes, I “dug up” an article freely available on the internet posted by one of the largest news organizations on the planet. So much digging! Took four seconds.

Just curious, is calling me “orangelicker” and “orangesucker” really the best you’ve got? It implies that I support Trump, when you’re the actual orange licker/sucker here. Are you that dim? Wait, you live in Pittsburgh, and you’re arguing in favor of a criminal on an escort message board for Austin, Texas. I don’t even need to ask how dim you are when you prove it with every post.

zerodark, lustyturd is nothing but a sad, gender-confused troll from Pissburgh who keeps getting his ass kicked. He is a classic masochist. And you got it right about him being the orangelicker. lustyturd's beak is deep up Trump's ass!

[Coolbeans10]

Hillary Clinton is the moral authority on everything. Now go eat your meat children or you'll get no pudding.

[Austin Ellen]

Ha, I was wondering who you were talking with - I have one idiot on ignore and that is zero something wannabee. He's so fuckin stupid I couldn't stand it so I put his nasty ass on ignore - I can't see his stupid posts now.
It's a wonderful tool to have on this site.

Originally Posted by lustylad

So you hide behind a shoddy New York Times article and offer no comments of your own other than "your move, princess"... then when the article is picked apart and it becomes your move again, you turn into a blathering fool who has nothing but insults?

Look - I'm sure there are many fine, intelligent, well-bred and articulate folks in Austin who relish a good debate and know how our Constitution works. You're obviously not one of them.

[zerodark13]

Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Ha, I was wondering who you were talking with - I have one idiot on ignore and that is zero something wannabee. He's so fuckin stupid I couldn't stand it so I put his nasty ass on ignore - I can't see his stupid posts now.
It's a wonderful tool to have on this site.

I’ll bet she also has a tool to clear the bats and cobwebs out of her ancient pussy.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by zerodark13

You’ve picked noting apart, you simple dolt. What I find particularly hilarious is that the man who tried to take down Clinton (and failed, miserably) will be responsible for taking down your orange turd-god.

You’re the one who started throwing insults. You’re like a monkey at the zoo throwing shit who gets mad when somebody throws shit back at them. You have no concept of actual facts, the law, or indeed anything you’re posting about, which is great, because every time you post something, it just reinforces the fact that you’re a complete blathering idiot.

Keep fucking that chicken, sweetie.

Still your move, zerodick. Or are you content just to get in a few more cheap insults?

You have yet to offer an ounce of substance here. Even your NYT writer knows an official DOJ Office of Legal Counsel policy paper carries more weight than an old memo discarded by its requester.

And you think Ken Starr "failed miserably"? Get real, lol. Thanks to Ken's tireless efforts, none of us will ever look at a cigar the same way. Slick Willy will go down in the dustbin of history as a serial sexual predator, a perjurer, and the second POTUS in history to be impeached by the House of Representatives. Ever been to Slick Willy's Presidential Library in Little Rock? Don't miss the Blue Dress Room!

If you really want Kenny Boy to be responsible for "taking down" your orange boyfriend, why not fire Mueller and hire Starr? Then you can let him dig up that long-forgotten memo and see how far it gets him. Of course, you'll have to identify a crime first. Otherwise there will be nothing "actionable", as the lawyers say.

By the way, didn't you claim in a prior post to be "upholding the Constitution"? How can you uphold something about which you keep demonstrating no working knowledge?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Ha, I was wondering who you were talking with - I have one idiot on ignore and that is zero something wannabee. He's so fuckin stupid I couldn't stand it so I put his nasty ass on ignore - I can't see his stupid posts now.
It's a wonderful tool to have on this site.

Thanks for the heads up but I already got his number. What a loser. He should change his handle to LessThanZero.