Former Trump adviser Peter Navarro is convicted of contempt of Congress in Jan. 6 investigation

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

By voting for liars and traitors? You folks are all sorts of messed up.

The feeling is mutual, I'm sure.

 

[toobfreak]

YOu did not ask a question, Dumbass.

Hey shithead, here is the question again, FOLLOWED BY A QUESTION MARK. Answer it or go fuck yourself.

You made a weak attempt at insulting me.

It only takes a weak attempt to insult you, by merely pointing out what a lying, creep-ass, pathetic trolling dickwad you are. A 4 year old could tear holes in your every claim. You won't answer the question because it yet again destroys one of your baseless claims, that you can't even go one round with me because you know it'll expose you.

 

[Crepitus]

Yes, I understand, you vote for traitors and liars, while projecting such silly accusations on Trump.

Silly accusations?

Do you live under a rock?

 

[toobfreak]

The feeling is mutual

Bet that's what he said last night, huh, Weed.

 

[Crepitus]

Hey shithead, here is the question again, FOLLOWED BY A QUESTION MARK. Answer it or go fuck yourself.
View attachment 826879

It only takes a weak attempt to insult you, by merely pointing out what a lying, creep-ass, pathetic trolling dickwad you are. A 4 year old could tear holes in your every claim. You won't answer the question because it yet again destroys one of your baseless claims, that you can't even go one round with me because you know it'll expose you.

What post did you ask that in?

I gotta admit, sometimes I don't read your whole post. A lot of what you post is just irritating and/or moronic.

There's only so much a guy can take. you know.

 

[Crepitus]

Bet that's what he said last night, huh, Weed.

There's that fascination with homosexuality again.

 

[MaryL]

I have questions about this.

The main one is "why only him so far"?

Are others going to be tried as well?

If not, why?

IMHO every one of the people who refused to comply with congressional subpoenas should be charged.

Former Trump adviser Peter Navarro is convicted of contempt of Congress in Jan. 6 investigation

The two counts each carry 30 days to a year in prison, in addition to a maximum fine of $100,000.

www.nbcnews.com

My question is: Why aren't we indicting BIDEN for getting millions from China, and WHY do democrats deny that is even a "THING"? When, at the same time, democrats seem to think they can pick and choose "facts" to fit their needs?

 

[Crepitus]

Why aren't we indicting BIDEN for getting millions from China,

Because he didn't.

It really is just that simple.

 

[toobfreak]

What post did you ask that in?

Damn, you can't even use a computer or navigate the internet.

It was post #16, shithead.

I gotta admit, sometimes I don't read your whole post.

Kinda fade out, huh?

A lot of what you post is just irritating and/or moronic.

I bet, especially when it dices your ass to pieces as bad as I do.

There's only so much a guy can take. you know.

Not sure what you'd know about being a guy.

 

[toobfreak]

There's that fascination with homosexuality again.

Doctors have shots for that. Get you fixed right up.

 

[Crepitus]

Damn, you can't even use a computer or navigate the internet.

It was post #16, shithead.


Kinda fade out, huh?


I bet, especially when it dices your ass to pieces as bad as I do.


Not sure what you'd know about being a guy.

That wasn't a question, it was a deflection.

Doctors have shots for that. Get you fixed right up.

 

[beagle9]

maybe that weird gnome can publish a second manifesto of malignant maga lies, and independent thinkers like fraudball can then jerk off again to a "navarro report".

Spoken like a true leftist.

 

[beagle9]

My question is: Why aren't we indicting BIDEN for getting millions from China, and WHY do democrats deny that is even a "THING"? When, at the same time, democrats seem to think they can pick and choose "facts" to fit their needs?

It's called agenda soothing over the vast American electorate.

 

[beautress]

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong here: I heard that normally in these cases where an official Presidential aid or executive officer claims “executive privilege” before a Congressional committee … he can just appear and simply refuse to answer on these grounds.

I don’t know what if any legal measures can be taken to force him to answer questions that touch on knowledge gained in the course of his work, but I believe that traditionally there is not much Congress can or does do.

The problem apparently arose primarily because Peter Navarro refused even to appear, nor did he even claim he was too busy with his work to appear, as others have done in the past. Why Trump apparently isn’t backing him when Navarro has explicitly said the President asked him not to testify … also seems strange to me.

President Trump is a true blue decent person, and he may have asked him not to testify for the sake of his family not have to get hazed at the behest of Maxine Waters' Satan stalkers bullying their children and that could result in hard times for the Navarros and their children or known relatives and friends.

Stalking and harassing people is against the law for conservatives, but in DC la-la land, Democrats entitle themselves to do the devil's work if they feel like it, and Maxine waters is their microphone loudspeaker if she can beat up on Trump by using his staff and friends as her whipping targets. I find that rather villainous.

 

[toobfreak]

That wasn't a question, it was a deflection.

It was a QUESTION, dumbshit. By every definition in the book. Damn, fucking tards so stupid you have to argue with them over what a QUESTION is.

ANSWER THE QUESTION JACKASS OR GO GET STUFFED.
Even better: BOTH.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Spoken like a true leftist.

you sound obsessed. pray on it.

 

[Care4all]

Somebody please correct me if I am wrong here: I heard that normally in these cases where an official Presidential aid or executive officer claims “executive privilege” before a Congressional committee … he can just appear and simply refuse to answer on these grounds.

I don’t know what if any legal measures can be taken to force him to answer questions that touch on knowledge gained in the course of his work, but I believe that traditionally there is not much Congress can or does do.

The problem apparently arose primarily because Peter Navarro refused even to appear, nor did he even claim he was too busy with his work to appear, as others have done in the past. Why Trump apparently isn’t backing him when Navarro has explicitly said the President asked him not to testify … also seems strange to me.

the whole thing is weird!

why didn't Trump make an executive privilege claim with him? Why didn't Trump help him?

the law is the Executive, can make an executive privilege claim with Navarro or any adviser, and the advisor can not talk about what the Executive and advisor spoke about....

it has never been the advisor, making the executive privilege claim on their own????

the court ruled there was no executive privilege because the Executive, President Trump, never made an executive privilege claim on Navarro....

AND NEVER had it been that executive privilege means you just don't show up when subpoenaed to testify..... You show up, and answer the questions that do not pertain to anything privileged....

What in the heck is going on in Navarro's head?????

 

[beagle9]

you sound obsessed. pray on it.

Ohh the irony in your statement... ROTFLMBO

 

[beautress]

you sound obsessed. pray on it.

Project much?

 

[Crepitus]

It was a QUESTION, dumbshit. By every definition in the book. Damn, fucking tards so stupid you have to argue with them over what a QUESTION is.

ANSWER THE QUESTION JACKASS OR GO GET STUFFED.
Even better: BOTH.

No, it was an attempt to deflect the conversation away from subjects you find uncomfortable difficult to refute.

Which you are still doing.

I think we're done here, I can feel you draining the IQ outta yer general area as I type.