FBI conducted predawn raid of former Trump campaign chairman Manafort’s home

[Jeezy911]

So, what's the dollar value of a human life to you, then?

You mean the crackhead down the street that goes to the emergency room every other friday? Yea I don't want to pay for his insurance sorry, super I am a super mean person.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay folks, I'm gonna start by saying that I thinhehe.... hehehe.... hahahahaha.... HAHAHHAHAHAHA!

Oh fuck it. You fucking Trumpkins.
Each
And
Every
Single
Last
One
Of
You.

Never change.

Yes, you are generally correct in your theorizing. Flipping Manafort, Flipping Flynn, and probably others in time, is exactly what prosecutors do when going for the one they really want. My brother is a prosecutor for corruption and internal affairs in New York City. I asked him, and posted here, shortly after Mueller was hired, how he would go about it. He's followed the playbook, to the letter.

You people... you sorry, sorry people have been the ones, not us, screaming "where's the impeachment? Where's the proof".

All I have to say is: open wide and eat this.

I said that Trump will fall between (after) the 2018 mid-terms and before the 2020 election, with my bet being the span March-October 2019. That opinion is based on two facts:
(1) It will take time to shape the political terrain. 2018 has to be bad (or under-performing) for Republicans. Trump has to be a liability. He has to have a bad relationship with Ryan (getting there with Preibus's quitting), McConnell (already done), the House and Senate (already done). But this is a process that takes repeated failures, soul searching and time. In my estimation: we're ahead of schedule on this. I frankly thought Trump would be a good deal more popular with Republicans 200 days in. He's falling rapidly.

(2) Legal cases take tons of time. A trial would take years. If Mueller is trying to get Manafort and Flynn to flip by offering them deals based on what they know, that will take time too.


So in other words, welcome to the fucking show, boys and girls. Destroying a President is something that won't happen overnight. 15 days ago, the FBI took a radical step forward with their Pre-dawn raid, while the lot of you little, little people did yet another round of "where's the proof?!", "Nothingburger" or all your other little bullshitisms.

Where's the proof? In FBI hands. Thanks to a pre-dawn raid on the former campaign manager of your President. How do you like them apples? HA!

You must be bad at predictions: 2018 Dems may gain a seat or 2 but will not control either house or senate. If the democrats pursue impeachment, Republicans may pick up the needed 60 seats for an overwhelming democrat proof majority. I said the same thing about when Hillary was being investigated, if she would have been charged, she would have fired up the base and won in a landslide. Be careful what you wish for.

[Skroe]

You mean the crackhead down the street that goes to the emergency room every other friday? Yea I don't want to pay for his insurance sorry, super I am a super mean person.

No. That's just sick. Like actually pathologically sick.

Human life... life of your fellow American... has a cost to you? I'm all about budgeting and numbers. I'm pretty much the MMO-OT budget guy. But letting those in need suffer and die? Disgusting.

You can save your fucking policy argument. You got a serious moral deficiency that won't be corrected here, sonnyjim. Not living by "Survival of the Fittest" is one of those things that separate us from the animals, you know.

[Edge-]

You mean the crackhead down the street that goes to the emergency room every other friday? Yea I don't want to pay for his insurance sorry, super I am a super mean person.

Homeboy, you already pay for his emergency room visit. Paying for insurance for him is actually far cheaper than paying for his visit.

Also, one would hope that congress and the president will take drug related issues seriously, and as health issues vs. criminal issues. We already know Trump lied about taking the opioid epidemic seriously (he got a recommendation to declare it an emergency, Tom Price called it an emergency and said it would be treated as such, but Trump declined to do so. DELIVERING PROMISES!), but the issue is in combating addiction and providing treatment to get them off drugs so that they don't need to make these emergency room visits, not just throwing them in jail so they will continue their behavior.

And FYI - I'm not rich by any means, but I'm happy to pay a part of my taxes, or even a bit more, if it means we can help folks like the crackhead down the street. And I'm not even a part of the "Moral Majority".

Shit, how did we even get this far off-topic in a thread talking about the former head of Trump's campaign having his house raided by the damn FBI.

Also, remember that time Trump said, "We are going to take care of people dying in the street..."?

His words, home skillet.

[Jeezy911]

Son, you for real? What do you recommend should be done about healthcare in this country? Let's hear it

Well, not paying 20% more every year to pay for an entitlement would be a good start. So repeal, first and foremost.

- - - Updated - - -

No. That's just sick. Like actually pathologically sick.

Human life... life of your fellow American... has a cost to you? I'm all about budgeting and numbers. I'm pretty much the MMO-OT budget guy. But letting those in need suffer and die? Disgusting.

You can save your fucking policy argument. You got a serious moral deficiency that won't be corrected here, sonnyjim. Not living by "Survival of the Fittest" is one of those things that separate us from the animals, you know.

You are perfectly free to pay for his insurance if you would like, since you are on the moral high ground, I would rather not and believe that should be my right.

[mvaliz]

No. That's just sick. Like actually pathologically sick.

Human life... life of your fellow American... has a cost to you? I'm all about budgeting and numbers. I'm pretty much the MMO-OT budget guy. But letting those in need suffer and die? Disgusting.

You can save your fucking policy argument. You got a serious moral deficiency that won't be corrected here, sonnyjim. Not living by "Survival of the Fittest" is one of those things that separate us from the animals, you know.

While you are very VERY much correct...am i the only one that has to correct him that Crackheads most likely don't go to the emergency room every other Friday? o_O

In fact, with a Universal Healthcare system being government-based, if what Dingus McJerkzy claimed was even true - there probably would be some legislation passed that would probably require said "crackhead" to be submitted for Drug addiction therapy immediately after being treated from whatever he went to the Emergency room for in the first place.

[Skroe]

You mean the crackhead down the street that goes to the emergency room every other friday? Yea I don't want to pay for his insurance sorry, super I am a super mean person.

- - - Updated - - -



You must be bad at predictions: 2018 Dems may gain a seat or 2 but will not control either house or senate. If the democrats pursue impeachment, Republicans may pick up the needed 60 seats for an overwhelming democrat proof majority. I said the same thing about when Hillary was being investigated, if she would have been charged, she would have fired up the base and won in a landslide. Be careful what you wish for.

You're looking at the wrong problem, son. This is the map you should be worried about. This is the one the people in Congress and the Senate are looing ap.



Democrats are poised to clean up in 2018 and 2020, which places Democratic governors in state houses across the country. This will allow democrats to, in part, decide the boundaries for 2020 redistricting that first kicks into effect in 2022.

Or let me put this another way: the only win condition in 2018 is these races. If Democrats win the House and somehow win the Senate (where they are likely to lose seats), but lose governors and state legislature races, they still lose. If Republicans hold what they have, and lose at the State level, they still lose.

The winner of the 2018 and 2020 State-level races will be very well positioned to set the tone of the 2020s political climate, much as Republicans did in 2012 and 2014 thanks to their success in 2010 (2010 redistricting first going into effect in 2012).

So no. You're just looking at the wrong problem. If House and Senate Republicans leaders and financial backers see Trump threatening their party's position through the whole of the 2020s, they will throw him overboard with weights attached to his feet.

[Jeezy911]

Jesus...still trotting out that tired line? Do you people EVER put things in context?

Oh oh oh, do the "you didn't build that" next! Pretty please!

"We must pass the bill first to find out what is in it" from the house Majority leader at the time is "out of context?"

Yea ok

- - - Updated - - -

A- Not the worst. Like not even close.
B- Think how much better it would be if the republican party did not spend every waking second attempting to make it fail.

And what do the Democrats spend every waking moment on? Looks at thread.

[maomoa]

You mean the crackhead down the street that goes to the emergency room every other friday? Yea I don't want to pay for his insurance sorry, super I am a super mean person.

You pay for it anyways. The hospital absorbs the cost and then transfers it everyone else anyways either through write offs and lost revenue for taxes or they adjust the cost of their services. With better care, they could get treatment for their addiction and end the cycle.

So it's clear you have very little value for people who aren't you or might cost you a few hundred dollars a year to cover a large swath of society. You want all the benefits of the stable American society we have with non of the burdens. Lazy. Cruel. Selfish. I hope you never any of the terrible things life can throw at you, but if you do, I'd understand and help any way I can. If that's 2%, 5%, 10% more a year a have to pay in taxes, so be it. I live well and wish the same for others.

[Skroe]

Well, not paying 20% more every year to pay for an entitlement would be a good start. So repeal, first and foremost.

- - - Updated - - -



You are perfectly free to pay for his insurance if you would like, since you are on the moral high ground, I would rather not and believe that should be my right.

I would happily pay. Because it is the right thing to do. You should be ashamed of yourself and your lack of basic humanity.

I mean you can justify it all you want. Nobody cares. You just look like a rather awful person with that statement that you made. The homeless are usually mentally ill or suffer from severe depression and anxiety. Those are psychological disorders. Drug addiction is a medical condition. They deserve help. They can be saved. All of them.

What you are choosing to do is say that society should not collectively allocate resources to save them, because your fucking PlayStation 4 game collection needs another entry.

That. Is. Sick.

Very. Very. Sick.

We can debate until the cows come home on the primary means of financing or structuring such care. Perfectly valid policy debate. Balancing priorities is hard. But you exposed the kind of person you with that statement. And it's ugly as sin. We can toss policy out the window. It's irrelevant at this point.

Your problem is you were brought up badly, you didn't go to church, or your somehow, some way, you picked up some kind of values system that places the value of human life below that of how fat your wallet is.

Frankly man, if you fell on hard times, I'd want society to help you out. Because it is the RIGHT thing to do. We are stronger together. All of us. Even the mentally ill, the drug addicted, if helped, can make the world better. Society loses when they don't have the opportunity to do so because, frankly, pathologically, you can't be fucked.

[Jeezy911]

You're looking at the wrong problem, son. This is the map you should be worried about. This is the one the people in Congress and the Senate are looing ap.



Democrats are poised to clean up in 2018 and 2020, which places Democratic governors in state houses across the country. This will allow democrats to, in part, decide the boundaries for 2020 redistricting that first kicks into effect in 2022.

Or let me put this another way: the only win condition in 2018 is these races. If Democrats win the House and somehow win the Senate (where they are likely to lose seats), but lose governors and state legislature races, they still lose. If Republicans hold what they have, and lose at the State level, they still lose.

The winner of the 2018 and 2020 State-level races will be very well positioned to set the tone of the 2020s political climate, much as Republicans did in 2012 and 2014 thanks to their success in 2010 (2010 redistricting first going into effect in 2012).

So no. You're just looking at the wrong problem. If House and Senate Republicans leaders and financial backers see Trump threatening their party's position through the whole of the 2020s, they will throw him overboard with weights attached to his feet.

There are 34 seats up in 2018 for senate, of which 25 are held by Democrats. This is all you need to know. Simple math says good luck cleaning up.

[Edge-]

"We must pass the bill first to find out what is in it" from the house Majority leader at the time is "out of context?"

Yea ok

To see how the reality is vs. the rhetoric from the GOP about death panels etc, yes. The bill was public at this point, IIRC.

Please stop dishonestly presenting that clip out of context.

[cubby]

Really weak response. Not surprised given your response history that you'd take this out of context. But you've never been one for addressing the fallacy of your arguments like 'jammed' for a debate that took over a year vs some of the republican option that literally didn't come out until a week before it was voted on. Obviously you lack the ability to see her addressing the concerns about the bill that republicans had like the infamous 'death panels.'

You just take your talking points without the ability or effort to investigate whether or not they are factual.

Tell me again that the ACA was jammed down everyone's throat with a year debate this time without your garbage tier propaganda videos.

Also, how them death panels working out?

Jeezy911: Millions of people have died because of the ACA.

Just as a side note, people tend to forget that Obama went to a GOP only meeting and stood in front for two hours fielding questions about the ACA. McConnell/Ryan/Trump wouldn't even let their own party see it.

[mvaliz]

Well, not paying 20% more every year to pay for an entitlement would be a good start. So repeal, first and foremost.

No, you wouldn't be paying 20% more. Sure, your taxes would technically go up - but ultimately what you would be paying in taxes would be LOWER than what you currently pay for insurance each week. The reality is you would be ultimately saving a little more money AND get 100% coverage on everything + helping those in need. All you would do is win on Universal Healthcare.

That's right, Win... as in Winning! Like, the very thing Doofus Dummy McDump promised you but never seems to deliver on?

[alexw]

Okay folks, I'm gonna start by saying that I thinhehe.... hehehe.... hahahahaha.... HAHAHHAHAHAHA!

Oh fuck it. You fucking Trumpkins.
Each
And
Every
Single
Last
One
Of
You.

Never change.

Yes, you are generally correct in your theorizing. Flipping Manafort, Flipping Flynn, and probably others in time, is exactly what prosecutors do when going for the one they really want. My brother is a prosecutor for corruption and internal affairs in New York City. I asked him, and posted here, shortly after Mueller was hired, how he would go about it. He's followed the playbook, to the letter.

You people... you sorry, sorry people have been the ones, not us, screaming "where's the impeachment? Where's the proof".

All I have to say is: open wide and eat this.

I said that Trump will fall between (after) the 2018 mid-terms and before the 2020 election, with my bet being the span March-October 2019. That opinion is based on two facts:
(1) It will take time to shape the political terrain. 2018 has to be bad (or under-performing) for Republicans. Trump has to be a liability. He has to have a bad relationship with Ryan (getting there with Preibus's quitting), McConnell (already done), the House and Senate (already done). But this is a process that takes repeated failures, soul searching and time. In my estimation: we're ahead of schedule on this. I frankly thought Trump would be a good deal more popular with Republicans 200 days in. He's falling rapidly.

(2) Legal cases take tons of time. A trial would take years. If Mueller is trying to get Manafort and Flynn to flip by offering them deals based on what they know, that will take time too.


So in other words, welcome to the fucking show, boys and girls. Destroying a President is something that won't happen overnight. 15 days ago, the FBI took a radical step forward with their Pre-dawn raid, while the lot of you little, little people did yet another round of "where's the proof?!", "Nothingburger" or all your other little bullshitisms.

Where's the proof? In FBI hands. Thanks to a pre-dawn raid on the former campaign manager of your President. How do you like them apples? HA!

This was my thought as well. He's following the playbook to take down organized crime and other sorts of organized corruption to a T. The head of the snake is typically insulated by several layers of flunkies so you can't go straight for him. He doesn't have his fingers directly implicated in carrying out in the crime. Not in a way that can be easily ferreted out anyway. So you go for the flunkies. The ones who can be tied to wrongdoing and you get them to turn. Then you take down the boss.

[cubby]

There are 34 seats up in 2018 for senate, of which 25 are held by Democrats. This is all you need to know. Simple math says good luck cleaning up.

And this is how you Trumpkins define yourself. People give you facts, evidence, and analysis - and you look in an entirely different direction and ignore what was said. And you die a little each time you lie to yourself.

[maomoa]

Just as a side note, people tend to forget that Obama went to a GOP only meeting and stood in front for two hours fielding questions about the ACA. McConnell/Ryan/Trump wouldn't even let their own party see it.

Don't worry, this post will get the Westworld treatment.

- - - Updated - - -

Let's get back on topic: The FBI doesn't raid Manafort when there's a nothingburger.

[Jeezy911]

I would happily pay. Because it is the right thing to do. You should be ashamed of yourself and your lack of basic humanity.

I mean you can justify it all you want. Nobody cares. You just look like a rather awful person with that statement that you made. The homeless are usually mentally ill or suffer from severe depression and anxiety. Those are psychological disorders. Drug addiction is a medical condition. They deserve help. They can be saved. All of them.

What you are choosing to do is say that society should not collectively allocate resources to save them, because your fucking PlayStation 4 game collection needs another entry.

That. Is. Sick.

Very. Very. Sick.

We can debate until the cows come home on the primary means of financing or structuring such care. Perfectly valid policy debate. Balancing priorities is hard. But you exposed the kind of person you with that statement. And it's ugly as sin. We can toss policy out the window. It's irrelevant at this point.

Your problem is you were brought up badly, you didn't go to church, or your somehow, some way, you picked up some kind of values system that places the value of human life below that of how fat your wallet is.

Frankly man, if you fell on hard times, I'd want society to help you out. Because it is the RIGHT thing to do. We are stronger together. All of us. Even the mentally ill, the drug addicted, if helped, can make the world better. Society loses when they don't have the opportunity to do so because, frankly, pathologically, you can't be fucked.

I don't fall on hard times because I am consistently responsible in my life. It should not be mine, or the governments responsibility to hold up people who don't help themselves. Having kids out of wedlock shouldn't be rewarded, making bad decisions should not fall to the burden of someone else. I'm sorry but I disagree with your feelings based assessment.

- - - Updated - - -

And this is how you Trumpkins define yourself. People give you facts, evidence, and analysis - and you look in an entirely different direction and ignore what was said. And you die a little each time you lie to yourself.

Please feel free to believe "Democrats are going to clean up in 2018." I'm sorry that you are wrong if you think this, but unless something changes in like the next 6 months it's not going to happen.

[cubby]

I don't fall on hard times because I am consistently responsible in my life. It should not be mine, or the governments responsibility to hold up people who don't help themselves. Having kids out of wedlock shouldn't be rewarded, making bad decisions should not fall to the burden of someone else. I'm sorry but I disagree with your feelings based assessment.

And what about the people who made you? And those before them?

[Edge-]

I don't fall on hard times because I am consistently responsible in my life.

And if you develop cancer despite living a health life? Or get in a car accident that's no fault of your own?

You're aware that there are things outside of our control that can dramatically change our lives, right?

It should not be mine, or the governments responsibility to hold up people who don't help themselves.

Actually, in part, yes, it should. That's part of living in a society. Your idealistic notions of pure social darwinism are bunk.

Having kids out of wedlock shouldn't be rewarded,

It's not. If you think living on welfare with kids is a reward, why don't you try living on welfare/food stamps for a bit on your own? I mean, it's a reward, right?

making bad decisions should not fall to the burden of someone else.

Then leave society and live all by yourself in the woods.

I'm sorry but I disagree with your feelings based assessment.

[NYC17]

I don't fall on hard times because I am consistently responsible in my life. It should not be mine, or the governments responsibility to hold up people who don't help themselves. Having kids out of wedlock shouldn't be rewarded, making bad decisions should not fall to the burden of someone else. I'm sorry but I disagree with your feelings based assessment.

- - - Updated - - -



Please feel free to believe "Democrats are going to clean up in 2018." I'm sorry that you are wrong if you think this, but unless something changes in like the next 6 months it's not going to happen.

Cool. What happens if you are diagnosed with cancer and have 100's of thousands of dollars in medical bills for treatment that your insurance refuses to pay for?

You can be as responsible as you claim to be(you aren't) and still be fucked by reality.