The Donald Trump thread

[the other bob wilson]

You mentioned Watergate not me. I've said nothing about it.

The table I posted showed far more convictions under the Nixon and Reagan Presidencies than any others over the past fifty years - Watergate and the Iran Contra affair happened under their watch and, surely, must account for the majority of those convictions, your response to that table was to say a cryptic "it goes back a long way" - how is your comment relevant to what I posted?

[Wales-Bales]

The table I posted showed far more convictions under the Nixon and Reagan Presidencies than any others over the past fifty years - Watergate and the Iran Contra affair happened under their watch and, surely, must account for the majority of those convictions, your response to that table was to say a cryptic "it goes back a long way" - how is your comment relevant to what I posted?

Law enforcement has been suspect since the days of J. Edgar Hoover, and if you add in CIA black ops nothing is as it appears. The role of the DOJ is to decide who to go after and who to let off, so your chart also tells a secondary story.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Law enforcement has been suspect since the days of J. Edgar Hoover, and if you add in CIA black ops nothing is as it appears. The role of the DOJ is to decide who to go after and who to let off, so your chart also tells a secondary story.

These would be the same government agencies that decided to publicise a few weeks before the 2016 Presidential election that they were reopening the examination of Hilary Clinton's use of a private server whilst witholding the fact that they were undertaking a formal investigation into links between Russia and the Trump campaign I suppose.

Seems like you can use sweeping statements to support any point you want to (or expose the frailty of them).

[Wales-Bales]

These would be the same government agencies that decided to publicise a few weeks before the 2016 Presidential election that they were reopening the examination of Hilary Clinton's use of a private server whilst witholding the fact that they were undertaking a formal investigation into links between Russia and the Trump campaign I suppose.

Seems like you can use sweeping statements to support any point you want to (or expose the frailty of them).

You really are like a dog with a bone lately

[Wales-Bales]

The table I posted showed far more convictions under the Nixon and Reagan Presidencies than any others over the past fifty years - Watergate and the Iran Contra affair happened under their watch and, surely, must account for the majority of those convictions, your response to that table was to say a cryptic "it goes back a long way" - how is your comment relevant to what I posted?

Who's in charge here? Answers on a postcard..