Sometimes you need a slump buster.
i guess the same can be said about lying about getting a hummer from a fat chick
Sometimes you need a slump buster.
i guess the same can be said about lying about getting a hummer from a fat chick
Sadly, there's a lot of truth to this statement.I would lay even odds that he would admit to it in a Twitter tantrum at 2 in the morning some day.
I remember that commercial. The owl was asked and proved that it takes three.Have we ever had a President with as many businesses as this one. I'm not trying to excuse him, I just think his financial holdings seem to be more vast than any I have knowledge of, and I admit his is only conjecture. For all I know his real net worth may be negative. My guess is the thing about whether or not he influenced Flynn will be kind of like the owl asking how many licks it takes to get to the center of the Tootsie Pop, "The world may never know".
He could actually save face (with his koolaid drinkers) by claiming the government is too broken and that he could do more to Make America Great Again as a private citizen then resign and start his little alt-right media platform.At this point I think it more likely that he resigns and claims he was treated very unfairly. Very unfairly, believe you me.
or you drew the short straw and ran interference for your buddiesSometimes you need a slump buster.
That's never happened before.or you drew the short straw and ran interference for your buddies
It's not conjecture that he has used the Presidency to push his and his family's business interests.
One could say that anytime Obama mentioned the title of his book - he did the same, right?Obama's book sales keep income flush, tax returns show
The president earned $5.5 million in 2009 and paid nearly $1.8 million in federal taxes, according to tax returns. The Bidens report about $333,000 in income last year.
April 16, 2010|By Peter Nicholas
Share
Reporting from Washington — Brisk book sales lifted President Obama's income to $5.5 million in his first year in office, an amount that dwarfs that of his recent predecessors while in power and reflects the public's continued willingness to pay to read his writings.
On tax day, the White House released 2009 returns showing that the Obamas' income more than doubled from the year before. They collected $2.7 million in 2008, and $4.2 million in 2007.
Obama paid nearly $1.8 million in federal taxes and $163,000 in Illinois state taxes. Forty charities received $329,100 from the Obamas in 2009, with the biggest chunk ($100,000) going to the United Negro College Fund and CARE, which combats world poverty. Separately, Obama donated his $1.4-million Nobel Peace Prize award to 10 charities. Because he asked the entire award money be sent directly to the charities, he did not have to report it as income.
The return was filed jointly by Obama and his wife, Michelle, who had no professional income in 2009, according to the White House.
Remind me again, why is it that we have all this information about Obama's income?One could say that anytime Obama mentioned the title of his book - he did the same, right?
Because Obama's Kenyan income was not required to be added to his US income . Easier return. But you did dodge my questionRemind me again, why is it that we have all this information about Obama's income?
OK.Because Obama's Kenyan income was not required to be added to his US income . Easier return. But you did dodge my question
If one wanted to make a particularly stupid comparison, one so moronic that "apples and oranges" is insufficient to convey the absurdity of the comparison...then yes.One could say that anytime Obama mentioned the title of his book - he did the same, right?
Just like a good butt-kissing liberal should be. Obama making $5.5 million - his first year as President - touting his book left and right, and Trump's people touting his daughter's Clothing line -- is "Apples and Oranges" -- geez.....yeah, okay.OK.
If one wanted to make a particularly stupid comparison, one so moronic that "apples and oranges" is insufficient to convey the absurdity of the comparison...then yes.
Happy?
The impeachment process doesn't require a prosecutor. After the Starr episode, the independent counsel statute was allowed to expire. The whole matter is self-governed by the House. They can appoint whomever they want. The Executive Branch has nothing to do with it...The specific statute should be covered by CFR 2635.702 - Use of public office for private gain.
I don't know what this qualifies though, is it just a misdemeanor? Has he actually done this? I know the emoluments clause was one thing they were trying to get him on, but Kellyanne has already been referred for sanction by the ethics office for her Ivanka plug, and it wouldn't be hard to say that Trump was mixed up in that in some way as well. Granted he is the president, Sessions is the AG, so who is actually going to prosecute him? If there is no one willing to prosecute him of a crime then half of the entire reason for impeachment is gone.
Any thought of impeachment is far too early, and frankly just makes the Democrats look like they are throwing a hissyfit. This is going to require the long game, with tons of stamina. Now I could entirely be wrong, I never in a million years thought there were enough rubes to vote for this dude in the first place.
Good God Man.....Can't you see....we shouldn't bring up the past administration's doings.... it doesn't fit the current "sky is falling" narrative of being on the cusp of WWIII.......Just like a good butt-kissing liberal should be. Obama making $5.5 million - his first year as President - touting his book left and right, and Trump's people touting his daughter's Clothing line -- is "Apples and Oranges" -- geez.....yeah, okay.
That's a stupid comparison? lol -- you guys have such a boner for Trump -- it really is clouding your sense. It's crazy.
The fact that you see it as "moronic" -- does warm my heart though. Thanks!
Let's see--Obama referencing his book in speeches because it explains his policy ideas in greater detail v Trump official shilling for Ivanka's clothing line when she's supposed to be promoting the administration's policies. Yeah, no difference there. And let's not forget that the reason Ivanka's line was news in the first place was because Trump pitched a hissy fit because Nordstrom's decided to stop carrying the line.Just like a good butt-kissing liberal should be. Obama making $5.5 million - his first year as President - touting his book left and right, and Trump's people touting his daughter's Clothing line -- is "Apples and Oranges" -- geez.....yeah, okay.
I guess ignorance is bliss.The fact that you see it as "moronic" -- does warm my heart though. Thanks!
Given that you don't believe this to be that grievous, or maybe you do, Should Obama have been impeached for talking about his book? Let's assume all things equal, and neither President, with regards to the shilling for their own book/fashion clothes line, should have any fallout, where do you stand on the other things that are coming to light recently?Good God Man.....Can't you see....we shouldn't bring up the past administration's doings.... it doesn't fit the current "sky is falling" narrative of being on the cusp of WWIII.......
Guessing the response will be along these lines:Given that you don't believe this to be that grievous, or maybe you do, Should Obama have been impeached for talking about his book? Let's assume all things equal, and neither President, with regards to the shilling for their own book/fashion clothes line, should have any fallout, where do you stand on the other things that are coming to light recently?
My view is to wait and see....I didn't agree with the circus trial to try and impeach B Clinton.....everybody on the right said..."but he lied under oath".....I said..." well, where he decided to sew his seed was no concern of anyone, and it should have never got to that point of having to lie to save face during proceedings"..Given that you don't believe this to be that grievous, or maybe you do, Should Obama have been impeached for talking about his book? Let's assume all things equal, and neither President, with regards to the shilling for their own book/fashion clothes line, should have any fallout, where do you stand on the other things that are coming to light recently?