revote 2016

hawkwing wrote:

https://twitter.com/tinsleman/status/1011650312300621825



Any Trump supporters want to sell me their Harley that they will now refuse to ride? I'm interested at $500.

SCJ nominees>>>>>>>>>>> higher priced Harley due to some (potentially) bad economic policies.



But you do you. Democrats promised lower healthcare. Maybe time to join them if you want promises of lower cost, no matter the economic real world implications.



I thank the heavens everyday we didn't get HRc. USA Dodged a cannonball by inches.

ABYUFAN wrote:

ABYUFAN wrote:

https://twitter.com/tinsleman/status/1011650312300621825



Any Trump supporters want to sell me their Harley that they will now refuse to ride? I'm interested at $500.

Harley Davidsons are not efficient, exceptionally powerful or reliable.



Harley riders love their bikes IN SPITE of their bikes. Now they can love them in spite of the CEO's opinions as well.

Haha spot on! And now there will be fewer American workers building those Harleys for Americans to love in spite of....

I'm not certain that there will be any fewer American workers building Harleys. It looked to me that the production for overseas Harleys are what's going to be sent out - My impression are those are the Street 500/750 bikes which are largely produced overseas already. I have no idea as to the amount of domestically produced Harleys that are exported to begin with. So I don't know enough about the production Harleys to comment here - but like any good American I will not let that lack of knowledge stop me from spouting something off.

Harley D said it was moving some US based production to Europe due to tariffs. Moving that production will mean fewer US workers methinks even if the bikes were destined for Europe....

BoiseBYU wrote:

BoiseBYU wrote:

hawkwing wrote:

https://twitter.com/tinsleman/status/1011650312300621825



Any Trump supporters want to sell me their Harley that they will now refuse to ride? I'm interested at $500.

Harley Davidsons are not efficient, exceptionally powerful or reliable.



Harley riders love their bikes IN SPITE of their bikes. Now they can love them in spite of the CEO's opinions as well.

Haha spot on! And now there will be fewer American workers building those Harleys for Americans to love in spite of....

I'm not certain that there will be any fewer American workers building Harleys. It looked to me that the production for overseas Harleys are what's going to be sent out - My impression are those are the Street 500/750 bikes which are largely produced overseas already. I have no idea as to the amount of domestically produced Harleys that are exported to begin with. So I don't know enough about the production Harleys to comment here - but like any good American I will not let that lack of knowledge stop me from spouting something off.

Harley D said it was moving some US based production to Europe due to tariffs. Moving that production will mean fewer US workers methinks even if the bikes were destined for Europe....

We're probably both saying the same thing - we agree that fewer bikes means less production - means means fewer shifts. What I was not clear in saying is that I don't know if that means fewer seasonal or part time shifts or overtime shifts or if it is significant enough to effect an entire assembly line. It may be that the same number of employees are there, but they just have fewer overtime opportunities. Maybe a distinction without a difference.

My two cents. I would vote once again for Trump who turned out to be even more Conservative than one of my most favorite presidents Ronald Reagan (at least to this point). I was of the opinion that we didn't need another "politician" but a true executive and Trump has shown that that is what we got.

As for all these tariffs etc. they are bargaining points and ploys. If you just talk and don't show action then nobody takes you serious which is what every President has been doing since Bush Sr rode the RR coattails to a presidency (and several presidents before him-I'm especially looking at you Jimmy!). Just give him some time and watch as our "friends" learn that they can no longer take advantage of us and start playing fair.

Late to this thread. Trump wasn't exactly my ideal candidate but I find myself rooting for him because he ticks off the liberals so much. And they're a thousand times worse than he is. Just him putting justices that actually follow the Constitution on the Supreme Court is a good thing.

With this trade war, China might way until the next president election before they are willing to talk. They could be patient enough to wait that long for someone else who will cave in.

After today’s press conference, I think the issue of whether Trump colluded with Putin is moot. I can’t figure what he’d have done or said different if he were a colluder. Sure the economy is going smoothly. But at the price of a Russian collaborator? God help this country.

BoiseBYU wrote:

After today’s press conference, I think the issue of whether Trump colluded with Putin is moot. I can’t figure what he’d have done or said different if he were a colluder. Sure the economy is going smoothly. But at the price of a Russian collaborator? God help this country.

Actions speak louder than press conferences to me. And trump has had plenty of teeth for russia along with those pats on the head to putin.



so far we have 12 guys posting crap on facebook as collusion (anyone here even use facebook, let alone become influenced by what you read on there)? I'm not impressed with 2 years of investigation from mueller at this rate.

BoiseBYU wrote:

After today’s press conference, I think the issue of whether Trump colluded with Putin is moot. I can’t figure what he’d have done or said different if he were a colluder. Sure the economy is going smoothly. But at the price of a Russian collaborator? God help this country.

I think Trump has a problem when he speaks off the cuff in drawing a distinction between Russian meddling (which he has acknowledged in the past took place) and his campaign colluding with Russia as part of that meddling (which he has always denied).



The press conference is overblown IMHO. I don't think this is any more treasonous that Obama telling Medvedev in 2012 to "tell Vladimir that after the election I will have more flexibility" to negotiate nuclear missiles. I don't have a problem with Trump expressing distrust of the political individuals at the top of our national intelligence when it was led by guys like James Clapper (DNI) and John Brennan (CIA Dir), both of whom lied under oath to Congress to further political aims and protect Obama. To me, saying he doesn't trust them is about as treasonous as a Democrat saying they don't trust Trump. What's controversial about expressing distrust of proven liars?

snoscythe wrote:

After today’s press conference, I think the issue of whether Trump colluded with Putin is moot. I can’t figure what he’d have done or said different if he were a colluder. Sure the economy is going smoothly. But at the price of a Russian collaborator? God help this country.

I think Trump has a problem when he speaks off the cuff in drawing a distinction between Russian meddling (which he has acknowledged in the past took place) and his campaign colluding with Russia as part of that meddling (which he has always denied).



The press conference is overblown IMHO. I don't think this is any more treasonous that Obama telling Medvedev in 2012 to "tell Vladimir that after the election I will have more flexibility" to negotiate nuclear missiles. I don't have a problem with Trump expressing distrust of the political individuals at the top of our national intelligence when it was led by guys like James Clapper (DNI) and John Brennan (CIA Dir), both of whom lied under oath to Congress to further political aims and protect Obama. To me, saying he doesn't trust them is about as treasonous as a Democrat saying they don't trust Trump. What's controversial about expressing distrust of proven liars?

I think words do matter, particularly when you are the President of the United States. Throwing your entire intelligence community under the bus (not just former intelligence officers), including his man who is leading the intelligence work, Dan Coats, is egregiously wrong. Trump's actions this last week were more than a few words off the cuff. Virtually everything he did in Europe last week, not just the press conference, worked to undercut NATO and our European allies and gave support to a leader who sanctions murder, murderous rulers, and corruption. This was a bad week for the United States. I am not up to speed on the 12 Russian intelligence officers charged with crimes under federal criminal law...I assume they did more than just post on FaceBook?

BoiseBYU wrote:
I am not up to speed on the 12 Russian intelligence officers charged with crimes under federal criminal law...I assume they did more than just post on FaceBook?

Again, even Trump has admitted that Russia meddled, and he admitted that long before this past week. I'm also pretty sure that violating other countries' laws is part and parcel of an intelligence officers' job, even those working for the US.



The idea that we should push for their extradition to face charges for election meddling is laughable. The last thing the US wants to do is create a precedent that intelligence staffers are subject to extradition to face charges for interfering/meddling in foreign elections.



Once we start arguing for the extradition of Russian operatives, are we going to volunteer to allow extradition of US intelligence officers who have meddled in:

- Iran

- Nicaragua

- Venezuela

- Egypt

- Libya

- Ukraine

- Guatemala

- Haiti

- Congo

- Vietnam

- Afghanistan

- Indonesia

- Pakistan (I believe Pakistan has even gone so far as to request extradition of our operatives)

- Italy (okay, admittedly that one was in the 1940s during wartime, but still....)

- Chile

- Honduras (under Secretary of State Clinton)



In Latin America there's even a joke:

Q: Why has there never been a coup in Washington D.C.?

A: Because there is no US Embassy there.



So, are we really that upset that Russia meddled when that's pretty much been what we do all over the world? What's ironic is that if we're against foreign powers meddling in elections, why are people upset that Trump is trying to gut the National Endowment for Democracy--the organization through which our government does a large part of its meddling.



I get being concerned or outraged at the idea of collusion--a US candidate working with foreign powers to undermine his opponents. Regular old meddling and interference by governments in other governments' elections is just par for the course.

snoscythe wrote:

I am not up to speed on the 12 Russian intelligence officers charged with crimes under federal criminal law...I assume they did more than just post on FaceBook?

Again, even Trump has admitted that Russia meddled, and he admitted that long before this past week. I'm also pretty sure that violating other countries' laws is part and parcel of an intelligence officers' job, even those working for the US.



The idea that we should push for their extradition to face charges for election meddling is laughable. The last thing the US wants to do is create a precedent that intelligence staffers are subject to extradition to face charges for interfering/meddling in foreign elections.



Once we start arguing for the extradition of Russian operatives, are we going to volunteer to allow extradition of US intelligence officers who have meddled in:

- Iran

- Nicaragua

- Venezuela

- Egypt

- Libya

- Ukraine

- Guatemala

- Haiti

- Congo

- Vietnam

- Afghanistan

- Indonesia

- Pakistan (I believe Pakistan has even gone so far as to request extradition of our operatives)

- Italy (okay, admittedly that one was in the 1940s during wartime, but still....)

- Chile

- Honduras (under Secretary of State Clinton)



In Latin America there's even a joke:

Q: Why has there never been a coup in Washington D.C.?

A: Because there is no US Embassy there.



So, are we really that upset that Russia meddled when that's pretty much been what we do all over the world? What's ironic is that if we're against foreign powers meddling in elections, why are people upset that Trump is trying to gut the National Endowment for Democracy--the organization through which our government does a large part of its meddling.



I get being concerned or outraged at the idea of collusion--a US candidate working with foreign powers to undermine his opponents. Regular old meddling and interference by governments in other governments' elections is just par for the course.

Thanks. Again, I do not know what crimes they were charged with. If it just "meddling," that seems weak sauce.

Trump appeared to side with Russia against the United States of America. That's bad.

snoscythe wrote:

I am not up to speed on the 12 Russian intelligence officers charged with crimes under federal criminal law...I assume they did more than just post on FaceBook?

Again, even Trump has admitted that Russia meddled, and he admitted that long before this past week. I'm also pretty sure that violating other countries' laws is part and parcel of an intelligence officers' job, even those working for the US.



The idea that we should push for their extradition to face charges for election meddling is laughable. The last thing the US wants to do is create a precedent that intelligence staffers are subject to extradition to face charges for interfering/meddling in foreign elections.



Once we start arguing for the extradition of Russian operatives, are we going to volunteer to allow extradition of US intelligence officers who have meddled in:

- Iran

- Nicaragua

- Venezuela

- Egypt

- Libya

- Ukraine

- Guatemala

- Haiti

- Congo

- Vietnam

- Afghanistan

- Indonesia

- Pakistan (I believe Pakistan has even gone so far as to request extradition of our operatives)

- Italy (okay, admittedly that one was in the 1940s during wartime, but still....)

- Chile

- Honduras (under Secretary of State Clinton)



In Latin America there's even a joke:

Q: Why has there never been a coup in Washington D.C.?

A: Because there is no US Embassy there.



So, are we really that upset that Russia meddled when that's pretty much been what we do all over the world? What's ironic is that if we're against foreign powers meddling in elections, why are people upset that Trump is trying to gut the National Endowment for Democracy--the organization through which our government does a large part of its meddling.



I get being concerned or outraged at the idea of collusion--a US candidate working with foreign powers to undermine his opponents. Regular old meddling and interference by governments in other governments' elections is just par for the course.

I'm pretty sure there was never any real intent in these indictments to try to bring the Russians to trial in the US. The point is that Mueller's indictments are pretty detailed and they wanted some of the facts around the Russians' hacking to influence our politics and election to be made public. It also mentioned there were Americans involved but didn't name them yet. That's coming, IMO.

BlueK wrote:
The point is that Mueller's indictments are pretty detailed and they wanted some of the facts around the Russians' hacking to influence our politics and election to be made public.

A) Indictments state accusations and allegations, not necessarily facts.



B) The release of the indictments the eve of our President holding a summit with the leader of the other country leads me to question the motivation behind its release.

snoscythe wrote:

After today’s press conference, I think the issue of whether Trump colluded with Putin is moot. I can’t figure what he’d have done or said different if he were a colluder. Sure the economy is going smoothly. But at the price of a Russian collaborator? God help this country.

I think Trump has a problem when he speaks off the cuff in drawing a distinction between Russian meddling (which he has acknowledged in the past took place) and his campaign colluding with Russia as part of that meddling (which he has always denied).



The press conference is overblown IMHO. I don't think this is any more treasonous that Obama telling Medvedev in 2012 to "tell Vladimir that after the election I will have more flexibility" to negotiate nuclear missiles. I don't have a problem with Trump expressing distrust of the political individuals at the top of our national intelligence when it was led by guys like James Clapper (DNI) and John Brennan (CIA Dir), both of whom lied under oath to Congress to further political aims and protect Obama. To me, saying he doesn't trust them is about as treasonous as a Democrat saying they don't trust Trump. What's controversial about expressing distrust of proven liars?

Also, bear in mind that the 17 intel agencies actually turned out to be only three, the ones headed by Brennan, Clapper, and Comey.

And as for the Russian hacking of the DNC server - I completely trust that investigation- FBI told to leave the server alone, outside company hired to do the forensics, then it turns out that that company is a subsidiary of Fusion GPS. Nothing to see here folks. "The Russians did it trust us". Also, please ignore Asange he doesn't know what he's talking about in his denial that he got them from the Russians.

Meanwhile, all kinds of pardons and equipment destruction (some by the FBI) and indictments that have nothing to do with Russia-Trump collusion except to try and force someone to not only tell a tale but to write a new one. I wish I could get hired into Rosenstein's position. I'd tell squishy to just stay recused and I would do some serious house cleaning. And you could bet HRC, Brennan, Comey, Rosenstein, and all their ilk would end up in orange attire. So much bad stuff from democrats and the establishment. And none of this would have ever seen the light of day if not for Trump. Including lower taxes, lowest unemployment levels in decades and lowest ever for blacks and Hispanics, ISIS (the JV team) now virtually wiped out, the US not "enforcing" the Iran deal that was never signed by them and only had us giving them everything, not being in the Paris accord where it basically was the US would pay 90% of what they wanted to the rest of the world so 3rd world dictators can stay in power, and so much more, but that just proves he is a Russian agent because a real American would put every other country first after all every culture and government is of equal value and importance.



And if the only evidence of collusion is that Trump has been making nice to Putin in the presser the I guess he must be guilty. Even though he has been way tougher on them than Obama and Hillary (and her reset button). He has hit them harder than any president except maybe RR and that includes all the rest of the Presidents since Russia became the USSR. Patton could have taken care of that issue if Eisenhower hadn't wanted to make nice with Stalin. How else would FDR been able to "give" half of Europe over to Stalin?

snoscythe wrote:

The point is that Mueller's indictments are pretty detailed and they wanted some of the facts around the Russians' hacking to influence our politics and election to be made public.

A) Indictments state accusations and allegations, not necessarily facts.



B) The release of the indictments the eve of our President holding a summit with the leader of the other country leads me to question the motivation behind its release.

And question it you should.

Mueller has one job..get Trump. That's it and everything he does is to try and get him one way or another.

The more time that goes on and the more information that comes out the more those who support Trump will support him and the more those that don't will not. Both will find whatever evidence and excuses they need to confirm their own bias.

Trump treats Putin the way most people treat their bosses. Russia has been having trouble with Montenegro, so Trump comes out and states that tiny Montenegro is trying to start WWIII. He does what he is told.

Mars wrote:

Trump treats Putin the way most people treat their bosses. Russia has been having trouble with Montenegro, so Trump comes out and states that tiny Montenegro is trying to start WWIII. He does what he is told.

Yep....

Killing your bosses soldiers, Trump doing what he was told

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-army-kill-russians-syria-civil-war-mercenaries-deir-ezzor-isis-a8268691.html



selling weapons to Ukraine which had to have pissed off Putin

just following orders, I'm sure



If you get a chance, look at trumps sanctions against russia vs previous admins.



Hard to imagine Putin being the boogie man some of you are making him into and thinking he "controls" trump. Putin's a low life dirtbag. However, his policies are a continuation of the last 50-60 years of intellegence warfare against the USA. It didn't start with trump, and it won't end with him, either. If anything Obama and the CIA let Putin have their way with America with the attacks we DO know about. I believe Brennan is the one we should be questioning about the whole RUSSIA angle.