Trump Ultimatum to Barr--Indict Biden before Election!

[Dill]

Indict Obama too!!

Has this been mentioned on another thread? Even so, maybe it deserves its very own.

Trump gives Bill Barr ultimatum as he demands roundup of political enemies
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-bill-barr-arrests-fox-news-clinton-obama-biden-obamagate-b885971.html
During a live phone-in on Fox Business, Donald Trump complained again that not enough of his political enemies have been arrested – and said attorney general Bill Barr could find himself in “a sad situation” if he doesn’t start rounding them up.

The blunt warning comes after Mr Trump left Walter Reed Medical Centre and returned to Twitter with a blizzard of angry tweets and retweets, many of them calling for the indictment of Obama administration figures.

The president’s rambling and ill-tempered interview with Maria Bartiromo on Thursday saw him run through a long list of his usual grievances, but he was particularly rancorous on the subject of supposed Obama-era “crimes” against him for which he wants to see his predecessor indicted, along with Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and many others.

“Unless Bill Barr indicts these people for crimes,” declared the president, “the greatest political crime in the history of our country, then we’re gonna get little satisfaction unless I win. Because I won’t forget it. But these people should be indicted, this was the greatest political crime in the history of our country. And that includes Obama, and that includes Biden; these are people that spied on my campaign, and we have everything.

Donald Trump Calls for AG Barr to Indict Joe Biden With 26 Days Until Election
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-calls-ag-barr-indict-joe-biden-26-days-until-election-1537518

On Thursday, Trump told Fox Business' Maria Bartiromo that Biden and Obama "spited' his campaign and urged Attorney General Bill Barr to indict them because "we got plenty, you don't need any more." Without an indictment, Trump said, "we'll get little satisfaction," and he "won't forget it."

[Belsnickel]

Fascists going to fascism.

[treee]

As has been said before, it is really not smart for Trump to be trying to set the precedent of prosecuting previous presidents. But then again one might say foresight isn't his strong suit.

[Dill]

(10-09-2020, 07:26 AM)treee Wrote: As has been said before, it is really not smart for Trump to be trying to set the precedent of prosecuting previous presidents. But then again one might say foresight isn't his strong suit.

Oh I don't know. Biden will be under indictment too. Tough campaigning from jail.

Hillary is in the mix as well.

Later in the Fox Business interview, while expounding the theme of Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails, Mr Trump appeared to suggest that he might take a more active role in his proposed criminal roundups.

“She should be indicted for that!” he shouted down the phone. “If people delete emails in a regular court case – she deleted 33,000 emails and nothing happens to her! Our justice system, nothing happens to her. With all of the pages of stuff, thousands of pages that we have on them, nothing happens to them, nothing happens.

“And you know, I said I’m gonna not get involved, I’m gonna have to get involved, because these people are crooked people.”

[Dill]

(10-09-2020, 07:01 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Fascists going to fascism.

Publicly pressuring Barr to stop wasting time and start .

“To be honest, Bill Barr’s gonna go down either as the greatest attorney general in the history of the country or he’s gonna go down as a very sad, sad situation. I mean, I’ll be honest with you. He’s got all the information he needs. They wanna get more, more, more, they keep getting more, I say: ‘You don’t need any more. You got more stuff than anybody’s ever had.’” 

Sort of like when Trump wanted the Ukraine announcement of "dirt" on Biden.

I'm guessing Barr knows he can't really do Trump wants. The whole Obama/Biden-spied-on-me schtick is exposed if he moves on this.

But might a COVOD-addled and panicky Trump actually threaten him with replacement? Would Barr step down, have to be fired? Give in and call a Grand Jury?  

Or might Trump back down, or simply succumb to some other distraction or tactic and forget it?

Asked how history would look at him after dropping charges against Flynn, he said "History is written by the winners." That's not looking good now. Acting on Trump's wishes now would make that "history" much worse.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-09-2020, 07:01 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Fascists going to fascism.

Didn't realize that wanting people to go to prison who you think committed various crimes was considered facism. 

But, I guess whether or not a crime was committed only matters if it's the current sitting president. 

[Luvnit2]

(10-09-2020, 09:57 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Didn't realize that wanting people to go to prison who you think committed various crimes was considered facism. 

But, I guess whether or not a crime was committed only matters if it's the current sitting president. 

You have to understand, these are same idiots who loved tax payers spent over 30 million follars and years going after a sitting President for crimes only in the end to come up empty, the tainted Mueller investigation packed with anti Trump lawyers found nothing against Trump or his family.

Now when shoe is in other foot, they want to ignore all of the reasons it is very legit to investigate crimes by Obama, Biden, Rice, Brennan, Hunter Biden, Comey and the list goes on on and on. Why do they get a pass when Democratic politicians and the DOJ weaponized to remove a sitting president?

Why did every member of the Mueller team wipe their phones? Again, innocent people do not destroy evidence. Let us try that and I guarantee you we end of jail in two seconds.

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2020, 09:57 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Didn't realize that wanting people to go to prison who you think committed various crimes was considered facism. 

But, I guess whether or not a crime was committed only matters if it's the current sitting president. 

Well, my reason for considering Trump to be a fascist is because he checks most of the boxes from every expert on the topic I've ever read, including the list from Ur-Fascism by Umberto Eco. I call this a fascist act because of the context falling in line with several of those, as well.

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2020, 10:17 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You have to understand, these are same idiots who loved tax payers spent over 30 million follars and years going after a sitting President for crimes only in the end to come up empty, the tainted Mueller investigation packed with anti Trump lawyers found nothing against Trump or his family.

Well, actually, they did find things on Trump and his family.

(10-09-2020, 10:17 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Now when shoe is in other foot, they want to ignore all of the reasons it is very legit to investigate crimes by Obama, Biden, Rice, Brennan, Hunter Biden, Comey and the list goes on on and on. Why do they get a pass when Democratic politicians and the DOJ weaponized to remove a sitting president?

Except, the things that have actual legitimate concerns surrounding them have been investigated. Some of these things have no legitimate concern surrounding them, though, just asinine conspiracy theories.

(10-09-2020, 10:17 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why did every member of the Mueller team wipe their phones? Again, innocent people do not destroy evidence. Let us try that and I guarantee you we end of jail in two seconds.

Source?

[*PhilHos*]

(10-09-2020, 10:26 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, my reason for considering Trump to be a fascist is because he checks most of the boxes from every expert on the topic I've ever read, including the list from Ur-Fascism by Umberto Eco. I call this a fascist act because of the context falling in line with several of those, as well.

No, I get that Trump says quite a few things that are considered facist. But, considering that he most likely truly believes these people committed crimes against him, I don't know why your first response would be that this is another facist moment.

[Big Boss]

Trump's been in office for four years. The Republicans have held the Senate that entire time, and they held the House two out of those four years. Trump appointed William Barr (DOJ) and Christopher Wray (FBI). He had a Supreme Court judge appointed (Brett Kavanaugh), and is rushing to get another one appointed as we speak - thus stacking the Court. A lot of factors in Trump's favor, yet he still can't seem to get much done when it comes to investigating and indicting his political opponents.

Go ahead and direct Barr (with a veiled threat) to investigate Biden, Obama, and Clinton. Nothing actionable will come of it, just as nothing actionable came of the Russia investigation.

[GMDino]

(10-09-2020, 09:57 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Didn't realize that wanting people to go to prison who you think committed various crimes was considered facism. 

But, I guess whether or not a crime was committed only matters if it's the current sitting president. 

Do you want everyone to go to prison who someone else "thinks" committed "crimes"?

I don't think is something was would want let alone the POTUS demanding/requesting his DOJ arrest his political rivals based largely on conspiracy theories.

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2020, 10:51 AM)PhilHos Wrote: No, I get that Trump says quite a few things that are considered facist. But, considering that he most likely truly believes these people committed crimes against him, I don't know why your first response would be that this is another facist moment.

I don't think he actually believes they committed crimes. I think they are political enemies and he is using this to rally his base in the final three weeks of an election he isn't projected to do well in.

[GMDino]

(10-09-2020, 11:02 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't think he actually believes they committed crimes. I think they are political enemies and he is using this to rally his base in the final three weeks of an election he isn't projected to do well in.

Which (as you know because we listen to similar podcasts) is the usual Trump defense:  He doesn't mean it...he's lust a loudmouth.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-09-2020, 11:00 AM)GMDino Wrote: Do you want everyone to go to prison who someone else "thinks" committed "crimes"?

Nope. I only want those who committed crimes to go to prison. 

Do you think Trump should be impeached and/or go to prison for his crimes? If so, is that facist of you to think that?

[GMDino]

(10-09-2020, 11:07 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Nope. I only want those who committed crimes to go to prison. 

Do you think Trump should be impeached and/or go to prison for his crimes? If so, is that facist of you to think that?

He is being investigated and if he there is enough evidence he should be charged and tried and if convicted he should go to prison.  I'd love to see it.

He was impeached based on the evidence.  Didn't bother me at all.

However, and this a big point, I'm not the POTUS calling for my political rivals to be arrested without solid reasons.  So no, that is not fascist of me.

[*Nately120*]

Have chants of "LOCK HIM UP!" started yet?

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2020, 11:05 AM)GMDino Wrote: Which (as you know because we listen to similar podcasts) is the usual Trump defense:  He doesn't mean it...he's lust a loudmouth.

I actually stopped listening to most political podcasts. Helps the anxiety.

[GMDino]

(10-09-2020, 11:20 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I actually stopped listening to most political podcasts. Helps the anxiety.

I still listen to LRC and ATPL.  That's all though.


But let me recommend Bunga Bunga.

In fact let me recommend that to ALL board members.

[hollodero]

(10-09-2020, 09:57 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Didn't realize that wanting people to go to prison who you think committed various crimes was considered facism. 

Well, if there is no evidence and even the most friendly DOJ boss could not come up with anything indictable, then there's strong indication he just wants his political opponents jailed for being his political opponents.

(10-09-2020, 09:57 AM)PhilHos Wrote: But, I guess whether or not a crime was committed only matters if it's the current sitting president. 

But again, there is no indication a crime by Obama, Biden and all the others was committed. With your line of argument, you could justify jailing just anybody that Trump wants to see jailed.