- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 13,571
- Reaction score
- 6,246
- Points
- 113
The Official Thread Dedicated to "Trump Winning"
- Thread starter Tim Steelersfan
- Start date
Of course Obama ran spying against a political opponent. We've known this all along. The facts are coming out.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="und" dir="ltr">Obama ran <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Spygate?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Spygate</a>. <a href="https://t.co/CWJEmvmACf">https://t.co/CWJEmvmACf</a></p>— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1208465169426325505?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 21, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="und" dir="ltr">Obama ran <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Spygate?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Spygate</a>. <a href="https://t.co/CWJEmvmACf">https://t.co/CWJEmvmACf</a></p>— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) <a href="https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1208465169426325505?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 21, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
That's gonna leave a mark. Impeach, impeach, impeach. Numbers? Soaring.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Mrs. Pelosi's Early Christmas Gift?<br><br>Overall Likely Voter <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> approval - 50%<br><br>Democratic Likely Voter approval of <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> - 22%<br><br>Black Likely Voter approval of <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> - 34%<br><br>Other non-white approval of <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> - 45%<br><br>Strongly approve/disapprove index - even <a href="https://t.co/3bK65yySGc">https://t.co/3bK65yySGc</a> <a href="https://t.co/MIidtW67DC">pic.twitter.com/MIidtW67DC</a></p>— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) <a href="https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1208134513357983750?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 20, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Mrs. Pelosi's Early Christmas Gift?<br><br>Overall Likely Voter <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> approval - 50%<br><br>Democratic Likely Voter approval of <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> - 22%<br><br>Black Likely Voter approval of <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> - 34%<br><br>Other non-white approval of <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@POTUS</a> - 45%<br><br>Strongly approve/disapprove index - even <a href="https://t.co/3bK65yySGc">https://t.co/3bK65yySGc</a> <a href="https://t.co/MIidtW67DC">pic.twitter.com/MIidtW67DC</a></p>— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) <a href="https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1208134513357983750?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 20, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Last edited:
I think this is simply described as "whoops!"
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is a tough chart for Democrats. <a href="https://t.co/k7FFahHNFy">pic.twitter.com/k7FFahHNFy</a></p>— James Pethokoukis (@JimPethokoukis) <a href="https://twitter.com/JimPethokoukis/status/1207996857403760640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 20, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This is a tough chart for Democrats. <a href="https://t.co/k7FFahHNFy">pic.twitter.com/k7FFahHNFy</a></p>— James Pethokoukis (@JimPethokoukis) <a href="https://twitter.com/JimPethokoukis/status/1207996857403760640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 20, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Here is what you don't understand.......the center of the country is more aligned with Trump than any of the chimpanzees that the Dems are running,
I disagree. Here are some links that express otherwise
Post Of The Week. Well, it's Saturday night so Post Of Next Week.
That nearly made me weep. So heartfelt and touching.
Lol. there you go again. Case in point!
At no time did I expect you to sob but rather do what you just did here!
Last edited:
I wonder if the mods would consider making this the masthead for this page? Since this is a Trump board, it would be appropriate. Maybe we could get a poll going...
Um, no idiot, He hasn't been impeached. The only thing that occurred that day was a vote TO impeach.
He isn't impeached until the articles reach the Senate.
Wasn't this already explained to you with a link provided? I'm tired of having to explain things to you twice.
Last edited:
Sums him up in a word very nicely.
December 18, 2019 - the Day Democrats Committed Suicide
What is the difference between the Democratic Party and Jeffrey Epstein?......Epstein didn't kill himself.
Polling and fund raising numbers are already showing us what we all knew. This was going to aid your President. Dumbest...move...ever.
Trump seeks to make impeachment a campaign asset
President Trump is hoping to turn the dubious distinction of impeachment into a rallying cry in his reelection bid.
Trump has long cast himself as a Washington outsider unwelcome by establishment politicians, and allies say he is likely to use the partisan impeachment votes to entrench that image and energize supporters on the campaign trail.
"I think it plays into an overriding message that I know the president and his team has been pushing for a while now,” one former White House official said.
The president's campaign has already set out to portray impeachment as a boon to its strategy. It has released limited but favorable polling data showing impeachment is unpopular in certain swing districts, and the campaign boasted eye-popping fundraising totals on the heels of Wednesday's vote.
Gary Coby, the campaign's digital director, tweeted Friday that more than $10 million in donations rolled in during the previous 48 hours.
What is the difference between the Democratic Party and Jeffrey Epstein?......Epstein didn't kill himself.
Polling and fund raising numbers are already showing us what we all knew. This was going to aid your President. Dumbest...move...ever.
Trump seeks to make impeachment a campaign asset
President Trump is hoping to turn the dubious distinction of impeachment into a rallying cry in his reelection bid.
Trump has long cast himself as a Washington outsider unwelcome by establishment politicians, and allies say he is likely to use the partisan impeachment votes to entrench that image and energize supporters on the campaign trail.
"I think it plays into an overriding message that I know the president and his team has been pushing for a while now,” one former White House official said.
The president's campaign has already set out to portray impeachment as a boon to its strategy. It has released limited but favorable polling data showing impeachment is unpopular in certain swing districts, and the campaign boasted eye-popping fundraising totals on the heels of Wednesday's vote.
Gary Coby, the campaign's digital director, tweeted Friday that more than $10 million in donations rolled in during the previous 48 hours.
Last edited:
This is what we call HUGE winning. Truly. It sets the stage for decades of Conservative court opinions.
Most of the Nation’s Circuit Courts Now Have Republican Majorities
Senate confirms avalanche of Trump-backed judges despite impeachment
Re-order in the courts!
As House Democrats try to force President Trump out of office, Senate Republicans have been plowing ahead with his plan to transform the federal judiciary.
A record number of judicial confirmations is cementing one of Trump’s central campaign pledges — and will reverberate for decades, even if impeachment pulls the plug on his presidency.
When Trump took office, nine of the nation’s 13 circuit courts were dominated by Democratic appointees. Now, seven of them have Republican majorities.
Trump has had 50 of his circuit-court judges confirmed — far more than any other recent president at this point in their first terms. President Barack Obama managed just half that number, 25, in the same time frame.
Altogether, 187 Trump-nominated federal judges have been confirmed by the Senate — outpacing the 169 new judges named by George W. Bush and the 166 brought on board by Bill Clinton in their first three years.
Senators approved two Trump nominees, Patrick Bumatay and Lawrence VanDyke, for seats on Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Dec. 10 and 11 as the House Judiciary Committee tussled over the phrasing of its impeachment articles.
And last week, as House Democrats voted to impeach Trump, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pushed 13 district court judges through the Senate.
“The pace is dramatic,” McConnell told radio host Hugh Hewitt Wednesday. “My motto for the remainder of this Congress is ‘leave no vacancy behind.’”
At the same time, the Senate’s efforts are giving Trump’s base reason to remain in his corner.
“Conservatives believe that the courts have been weaponized by the left. This issue has really ignited them,” Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network told The Post.
Most of the Nation’s Circuit Courts Now Have Republican Majorities
Senate confirms avalanche of Trump-backed judges despite impeachment
Re-order in the courts!
As House Democrats try to force President Trump out of office, Senate Republicans have been plowing ahead with his plan to transform the federal judiciary.
A record number of judicial confirmations is cementing one of Trump’s central campaign pledges — and will reverberate for decades, even if impeachment pulls the plug on his presidency.
When Trump took office, nine of the nation’s 13 circuit courts were dominated by Democratic appointees. Now, seven of them have Republican majorities.
Trump has had 50 of his circuit-court judges confirmed — far more than any other recent president at this point in their first terms. President Barack Obama managed just half that number, 25, in the same time frame.
Altogether, 187 Trump-nominated federal judges have been confirmed by the Senate — outpacing the 169 new judges named by George W. Bush and the 166 brought on board by Bill Clinton in their first three years.
Senators approved two Trump nominees, Patrick Bumatay and Lawrence VanDyke, for seats on Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Dec. 10 and 11 as the House Judiciary Committee tussled over the phrasing of its impeachment articles.
And last week, as House Democrats voted to impeach Trump, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pushed 13 district court judges through the Senate.
“The pace is dramatic,” McConnell told radio host Hugh Hewitt Wednesday. “My motto for the remainder of this Congress is ‘leave no vacancy behind.’”
At the same time, the Senate’s efforts are giving Trump’s base reason to remain in his corner.
“Conservatives believe that the courts have been weaponized by the left. This issue has really ignited them,” Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network told The Post.
Those nasty little Democrats are trying to take away people's guns in VA. And the people are fighting back, creating 2A sanctuary counties all over the state. The people, Conservatives, winning and beating the machine. And here is how...
https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-sh...off-second-amendment-sanctuary-proclamations/
The state Attorney General of Virginia seems to have finally grown tired of pesky counties and cities in his state passing Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions and would like to put the whole unpleasant affair behind him. But how does one do that? Why, by calling a press conference and issuing a proclamation, of course. Such resolutions are meaningless (according to the AG) and will have no effect on anything whatsoever. You have his word on it. (WaPo)
Owing to supremacy issues, it’s true that the counties and municipalities can’t pass laws that supersede state law. But that’s not really the purpose of the resolutions, is it? They aren’t passing laws saying that something is legal when state law claims that it isn’t. They”re simply saying that they won’t be expending the resources to enforce the law.
In that regard, it’s really no different than the sanctuary cities that welcome illegal immigrants (which I’m guessing Herring has no problem with). They can’t pass a law making it legal to be in the country without the proper documentation. Nor can they stop federal officers from enforcing those federal laws. They instead block their police officers from assisting ICE and CBP while performing their duties or expending resources toward those efforts.
If the Democrats in the Virginia state legislature pass laws that these counties, towns and cities believe to be unconstitutional, they simply won’t enforce them. If the Governor wants to send out the state troopers to every nook and cranny of the state to enforce the laws himself, that’s his prerogative. His other option would be to try to remove any officials who are not enforcing the new laws. But that immediately turns into a massive can of worms since he would be going after county sheriffs, executives, police chiefs and/or mayors. Most of them will have been elected by people who apparently like and support them (or who were appointed by the same).
If that’s the case, then the AG and the Governor will find themselves facing a rather hostile audience next November in parts of the state where they only barely squeaked out a majority in 2018. So Herring’s words are filled with plenty of bravado, but it sounds like he has little or nothing to back them up.
https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-sh...off-second-amendment-sanctuary-proclamations/
The state Attorney General of Virginia seems to have finally grown tired of pesky counties and cities in his state passing Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions and would like to put the whole unpleasant affair behind him. But how does one do that? Why, by calling a press conference and issuing a proclamation, of course. Such resolutions are meaningless (according to the AG) and will have no effect on anything whatsoever. You have his word on it. (WaPo)
Owing to supremacy issues, it’s true that the counties and municipalities can’t pass laws that supersede state law. But that’s not really the purpose of the resolutions, is it? They aren’t passing laws saying that something is legal when state law claims that it isn’t. They”re simply saying that they won’t be expending the resources to enforce the law.
In that regard, it’s really no different than the sanctuary cities that welcome illegal immigrants (which I’m guessing Herring has no problem with). They can’t pass a law making it legal to be in the country without the proper documentation. Nor can they stop federal officers from enforcing those federal laws. They instead block their police officers from assisting ICE and CBP while performing their duties or expending resources toward those efforts.
If the Democrats in the Virginia state legislature pass laws that these counties, towns and cities believe to be unconstitutional, they simply won’t enforce them. If the Governor wants to send out the state troopers to every nook and cranny of the state to enforce the laws himself, that’s his prerogative. His other option would be to try to remove any officials who are not enforcing the new laws. But that immediately turns into a massive can of worms since he would be going after county sheriffs, executives, police chiefs and/or mayors. Most of them will have been elected by people who apparently like and support them (or who were appointed by the same).
If that’s the case, then the AG and the Governor will find themselves facing a rather hostile audience next November in parts of the state where they only barely squeaked out a majority in 2018. So Herring’s words are filled with plenty of bravado, but it sounds like he has little or nothing to back them up.
Yeah, that whole diatribe Tibs rolled on and on about regarding Christians leaving Trump...
More bullshit from the king of the barnyard.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-graham-christianity-today-remove-billy-franklin-impeach
Franklin Graham slams Christianity Today for invoking father's name in call for Trump's removal
The son of the late pastor Billy Graham said his father would have been "disappointed" by Christianity Today's editorial calling for the removal of President Trump, which was widely celebrated by the left and crashed its website.
Evangelist Franklin Graham told Fox News his father "dissociated himself from the magazine years ago" and was "disappointed" himself by the "moral high ground" they've tried to take but don't have for invoking his father's name to get rid of Trump.
"My father knew Donald Trump, believed in Donald Trump, and in this last election, he voted for Donald Trump," the president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan's Purse added. "And if he were here today, I'm sure he would tell you that himself."
Graham responded in a lengthy Facebook post late Thursday to the editorial titled "Trump Should Be Removed From Office," just a day after the House of Representatives passed two articles of impeachment against him.
"Christianity Today released an editorial stating that President Trump should be removed from office, and they invoked my father’s name (I suppose to try to bring legitimacy to their statements), so I feel it is important for me to respond," Graham wrote. "Yes, my father Billy Graham founded Christianity Today; but no, he would not agree with their opinion piece. In fact, he would be very disappointed."
In his post, Graham points to Trump's many accomplishments that evangelicals have celebrated from pro-life policies to championing religious freedom at home and abroad. "Christianity Today wants us to ignore that?"
"For Christianity Today to side with the Democrat Party in a totally partisan attack on the President of the United States is unfathomable," Graham added, referencing Mark Galli, the editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, for failing to recognize that not a single Republican voted for impeachment.
More bullshit from the king of the barnyard.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-graham-christianity-today-remove-billy-franklin-impeach
Franklin Graham slams Christianity Today for invoking father's name in call for Trump's removal
The son of the late pastor Billy Graham said his father would have been "disappointed" by Christianity Today's editorial calling for the removal of President Trump, which was widely celebrated by the left and crashed its website.
Evangelist Franklin Graham told Fox News his father "dissociated himself from the magazine years ago" and was "disappointed" himself by the "moral high ground" they've tried to take but don't have for invoking his father's name to get rid of Trump.
"My father knew Donald Trump, believed in Donald Trump, and in this last election, he voted for Donald Trump," the president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan's Purse added. "And if he were here today, I'm sure he would tell you that himself."
Graham responded in a lengthy Facebook post late Thursday to the editorial titled "Trump Should Be Removed From Office," just a day after the House of Representatives passed two articles of impeachment against him.
"Christianity Today released an editorial stating that President Trump should be removed from office, and they invoked my father’s name (I suppose to try to bring legitimacy to their statements), so I feel it is important for me to respond," Graham wrote. "Yes, my father Billy Graham founded Christianity Today; but no, he would not agree with their opinion piece. In fact, he would be very disappointed."
In his post, Graham points to Trump's many accomplishments that evangelicals have celebrated from pro-life policies to championing religious freedom at home and abroad. "Christianity Today wants us to ignore that?"
"For Christianity Today to side with the Democrat Party in a totally partisan attack on the President of the United States is unfathomable," Graham added, referencing Mark Galli, the editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, for failing to recognize that not a single Republican voted for impeachment.
It could turn into a massive can of worms for "sanctuary" cities and counties when it comes to immigration law and someone wants to go to court. Of course Dems have never been known to think big picture or that they can't have things both ways.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 5,838
- Reaction score
- 4,788
- Points
- 113
Yep that sums up how Liberal elitists view all Trump voters. Which explains why Liberals keep losing at every turn. Keep on thinking that way, it's doing WONDERS for your party!
There are more of us than there is of them.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 5,886
- Reaction score
- 13,294
- Points
- 113
Well at least the guy wasn't doing his shtick in black face. That would be so wrong.
Poor Tibs. He has nothing at this point. I kinda feel sorry for the guy.
He's like the little engine that could, but just couldn't.
He's like the little engine that could, but just couldn't.
He posts for the reactions to them..........don't do it.
That's what I meant in that that's all he has left. I either chuckle or just feel sorry for the little Socialist, but not much more energy is spent here. You actually provide him with any facts and he'll just gloss over them.
He's got them checks from Uncle George, what more can a Lib want in life.
LOL....I know that is a phony pic but it's still amusing.
Sept'n them checks Steelworth, that's all he's in this for.