posted ago by Jojotherab
+18 / -0
It's pretty apparent now that Barr was useless from day 1 and came back from "retirement" to protect the corrupt. Whittaker was an attack dog from day 1 and seems like he could have done way more than this fucker. I'm also concerned as a Trump judge in Wisconsin dismissed the case "with prejudice".
It's pretty apparent now that Barr was useless from day 1 and came back from "retirement" to protect the corrupt. Whittaker was an attack dog from day 1 and seems like he could have done way more than this fucker. I'm also concerned as a Trump judge in Wisconsin dismissed the case "with prejudice".
not a swamp creature, wouldn't get confirmed by swamp creatures
If Trump mandated Whittaker to be the guy, he would have been the guy. What happened?
He would have done way better .Hell Howdy dudy would Have done better.
You are on the right path.. now think further and you'll realize that Trump never had that much control over nominees. He essentially had to pick from a list that RINOs will approve in the Senate.
And realistically speaking, 1 man cannot vet everyone, nor assess their competency and background. Trump has/had to rely on advisers.
RINOs essentially had Trump cornered, the moment Democrats won majority of House and are able to launch impeachment cases against him.
While surely he has made some not so good moves, anyone who blames all this on Trump is a dumbass. If Trump had a clear majority on House and Senate (non RINOs), and he had nothing done, then yes, you can blame him.
I guess I see where you are coming from and I"ve been spending a lot of brainpower trying to figure out who betrayed Trump from the very beginning. Trump won thanks to people like Roger Stone and Steve Bannon, who Trump unfortunately stopped relying on. But I don't know who it was that encouraged him to not count on these guys; listening to War Room on Election Night made it absolutely clear that Bannon was prepared for what the Dems were going to do