A simple question

[Nosmo King]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

 

[TNHarley]

I dont support trump but i will say this anyways
I think he should sit down with him and just get it over with.

 

[NightFox]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

Personally I can't fault Daffy Don on this call, sitting down with Robert Mueller is far more hazardous than sitting down with Kim or Putin. Kim and Putin are just brutal dictators but Mueller is a lawyer.

I'd rather sit down with Dracula than a lawyer, Dracula doesn't suck as much blood and he's a helluva lot more honest.

 

[Nosmo King]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

Personally I can't fault Daffy Don on this call, sitting down with Robert Mueller is far more hazardous than sitting down with Kim or Putin. Kim and Putin are just brutal dictators but Mueller is a lawyer.

I'd rather sit down with Dracula than a lawyer, Dracula doesn't suck as much blood and he's a helluva lot more honest.

What transpired in the Kim and Putin meetings? What commitments did Trump make in our name?

Are you not basically saying our national priorities should be protecting Trump over protecting our nation?

If lawyers are scary, why aren't Authoritarians?

 

[Pogo]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

Personally I can't fault Daffy Don on this call, sitting down with Robert Mueller is far more hazardous than sitting down with Kim or Putin. Kim and Putin are just brutal dictators but Mueller is a lawyer.

I'd rather sit down with Dracula than a lawyer, Dracula doesn't suck as much blood and he's a helluva lot more honest.

What transpired in the Kim and Putin meetings? What commitments did Trump make in our name?

Are you not basically saying our national priorities should be protecting Trump over protecting our nation?

If lawyers are scary, why aren't Authoritarians?

Ah, that last line.

It'll never be answered.

 

[TNHarley]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

Personally I can't fault Daffy Don on this call, sitting down with Robert Mueller is far more hazardous than sitting down with Kim or Putin. Kim and Putin are just brutal dictators but Mueller is a lawyer.

I'd rather sit down with Dracula than a lawyer, Dracula doesn't suck as much blood and he's a helluva lot more honest.

What transpired in the Kim and Putin meetings? What commitments did Trump make in our name?

Are you not basically saying our national priorities should be protecting Trump over protecting our nation?

If lawyers are scary, why aren't Authoritarians?

Ah, that last line.

It'll never be answered.

Bless you and nosmos heart!

 

[Pogo]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

Personally I can't fault Daffy Don on this call, sitting down with Robert Mueller is far more hazardous than sitting down with Kim or Putin. Kim and Putin are just brutal dictators but Mueller is a lawyer.

I'd rather sit down with Dracula than a lawyer, Dracula doesn't suck as much blood and he's a helluva lot more honest.

What transpired in the Kim and Putin meetings? What commitments did Trump make in our name?

Are you not basically saying our national priorities should be protecting Trump over protecting our nation?

If lawyers are scary, why aren't Authoritarians?

Ah, that last line.

It'll never be answered.

Bless you and nosmos heart!

Thangyew. We'll take that in the religious sense thanks.
Oh and an order of fries. With mustard.

 

[Indeependent]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

I don’t know.
Why is it you don’t give a shit when he meets with Chinese and Arabs.

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[Nosmo King]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

I don’t know.
Why is it you don’t give a shit when he meets with Chinese and Arabs.

Why no record of his meetings? Where are his advisers? His stenographers?

And if meeting with Authoritarians is no big deal for Trump,supporters, why the reluctant meet with an American lawyer?

Party/personality over nation?

 

[eagle1462010]

He has no reason to appear............Charge him or STFU

 

[Nosmo King]

And no traps were laid by Pitin or Kim?

If Trump can be trusted to meet privately with them, why is meeting Mueller so scary?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Oh and an order of fries. With mustard.

Eeeeeewwwww!

 

[Nosmo King]

He has no reason to appear............Charge him or STFU

He could clear the whole situation up by meeting with Mueller. He is the subject of the investigation, so, yeah he has a reason to appear.

 

[eagle1462010]

And no traps were laid by Pitin or Kim?

If Trump can be trusted to meet privately with them, why is meeting Mueller so scary?

The FBI uses that crap to perjury trap...........Why people always use I can't recall......or to the best of my memory...

Age old tactic........

He has NO REASON to go to Mueller..........

Mueller needs to provide evidence and show a crime............No one in America has to be questioned.........it's the 5th..........whether guilty or not......

Ask the Dems...........they are very good at it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

He could clear the whole situation up by meeting with Mueller. He is the subject of the investigation, so, yeah he has a reason to appear.

Only with a subpoena...

 

[eagle1462010]

Loretta Lynch fumbled on HSBC years ago. Now she can prove no bank is too big to jail | Bartlett Naylor

Lynch’s investigation did result in a December 2012 deferred prosecution agreement, which is a half-measure in criminal cases, somewhere between a conviction and exoneration. In this agreement, HSBC admitted to massive money laundering violations for narco-traffickers, terrorists and tyrants. This involved more than $200tn in wire transfers. But Lynch did not bring criminal charges against HSBC or any HSBC executives for this admitted money laundering.

Instead, the deal required that the bank pay $1.9bn, about five weeks profit in fines – money that was effectively paid by shareholders. The settlement also required HSBC to appoint a compliance monitor and institute reforms to prevent future wrongdoing. Lynch did not explain how they came up with $1.9bn. Was this more than the bank profited from money laundering? Was there some formula?

The settlement itself, and various Obama officials who chanced to appear before congressional panels at unlucky times, drew fire from understandably infuriated lawmakers. For example, Sen Elizabeth Warren challenged federal regulators including David Cohen, the undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence at the Department of the Treasury, in a Senate hearing in March 2013 about the calculation. She demanded to know how much money a firm needed to launder for the government to shut it down. Cohen declined to respond to such “hypotheticals”.

On 6 March 2013, the outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee that some firms are so large that a criminal case would lead to financial calamity.

I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if we do prosecute – if we do bring a criminal charge – it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy. I think that is a function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too large.

He has since walked these comments back.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

to the Trump supporters, if you're willing and eager to have Trump sit down with dictators like Kim and Putin without note takers or any other record of their meetings, why are you reluctant to have Trump sit down with note takers and recordings of a closed door meeting with Special Counsel Robert Mueller?

Clearly this is rhetorical.

 

[eagle1462010]

One of the biggest money laundering cases in the history of the United States..............No one charged........no one went to jail........

Guess who was on the board of directors and who they donated to..........

Care to render a guess..............I've already put this out on multiple threads.

 

[Nosmo King]

He could clear the whole situation up by meeting with Mueller. He is the subject of the investigation, so, yeah he has a reason to appear.

Only with a subpoena...

Would it be seen as a constitutional crisis should Trump be subpoenaed and refuse to,honor that subpoena?