Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
benson13

Mick Mulvaney: Trump Will Refuse To Pass Laws If Dems 'Punch Him In The Face' With Investigations

Recommended Posts

""""Acting"""" White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney on Sunday suggested that Donald Trump could not work with Democrats on legislation if they "punch him in the face" with investigations.

 

During an interview on Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace noted that Mulvaney laughed when he viewed a video clip of acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker being disrespectful to House Oversight Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY).

 

"Go ahead," Wallace encouraged. "People will see you laughing at that."

 

"Does the president recognize that Congress has an oversight role in addition to its legislative role?" the Fox News host asked.

 

Mulvaney agreed that "Congress had a right to do oversight," and he insisted that Trump is "not trying to discourage them from doing it."

 

"What he's saying is, 'Look, you have a choice, we can either work together on legislation or we can spend all our time doing these investigations but you can't do both,'" the acting Chief of Staff said.

 

"Wait," Wallace interrupted. "You can do both. And presidents have done both plenty of times."

 

"Right, but it's not reasonable to expect the president to work with you on Monday on a big infrastructure bill and then on Tuesday have you punch him in the face over 15 different investigations," Mulvaney replied.

 

https://crooksandliars.com/2019/02/mick-mulvaney-trump-will-refuse-pass-laws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forget...who does Mulvaney remind me of???....Oh yea, now I remember

 

 

 

t_500x300

 

th?id=OIP.VqaukDgjL3cGR_PyT2tjGQHaKN&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds fair. What's the problem with this? Pointless and baseless investigations take time and energy to defend against. If all his time is spent defending himself how can he possibly give adequate attention to new legislation? Signing without studying new law would be irresponsible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Right, but it's not reasonable to expect the president to work with you on Monday on a big infrastructure bill and then on Tuesday have you punch him in the face over 15 different investigations," Mulvaney replied.

 

Funny. That's always been expected of Democratic leadership. And they managed.....Clinton and Obama did it for 8 years. Then again, they weren't running a crime racket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neoconvict

""Signing without studying new law would be irresponsible""

 

 

 

LMFAO!!!....as if your 4th grader reads or "studies"...hes too busy watching Foxaganda for Idiots and tweeting out hateful remarks..."Executive time"

 

 

Sooooo Presidential!!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neoconvict

""Pointless and baseless investigations""
 

 

 

How many indicted so far???....How many in JAIL????

 

 

 

Comparing scandals by party

Just glancing at the chart above, it’s pretty clear which administrations are the most criminal, but let’s roll up the data anyway.

EXECUTIVE BRANCH CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES BY PARTY SINCE 1968
ADMINISTRATION

TOTAL YEARS

IN OFFICE

CRIMINAL

INDICTMENTS

CRIMINAL

CONVICTIONS

PRISON

SENTENCES

DEMOCRATIC 20 3 1 1
REPUBLICAN 28 120 89 34

Some might try to argue that this unfairly penalizes Republican administrations because GOP administrations held office for eight more years than Democratic administrations during this time period. The huge gap between the numbers shows how ridiculous that is, but even so, let’s get the averages per year of combined administrations:

AVERAGE EXECUTIVE BRANCH CRIMINAL ACTIONS BY YEAR SINCE 1968
ADMINISTRATION

AVERAGE #

INDICTMENTS

PER YEAR

AVERAGE #

CONVICTIONS

PER YEAR

AVERAGE #

IMPRISONMENTS

PER YEAR

DEMOCRATIC 0.15 0.05 0.05
REPUBLICAN 4.29 3.18 1.21

 

 

Even when we standardize it by getting annual averages, GOP administrations still have 29 times more indictments, 64 times more convictions, and 24 times more prison sentences. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NeoConvict said:

Sounds fair. What's the problem with this? Pointless and baseless investigations take time and energy to defend against. If all his time is spent defending himself how can he possibly give adequate attention to new legislation? Signing without studying new law would be irresponsible. 

Pelosi knows how...

 

"Let's pass it so we can see what's in it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, benson13 said:

Neoconvict

""Pointless and baseless investigations""
 

 

 

How many indicted so far???....How many in JAIL????

 

 

 

Comparing scandals by party

Just glancing at the chart above, it’s pretty clear which administrations are the most criminal, but let’s roll up the data anyway.

EXECUTIVE BRANCH CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES BY PARTY SINCE 1968
ADMINISTRATION

TOTAL YEARS

IN OFFICE

CRIMINAL

INDICTMENTS

CRIMINAL

CONVICTIONS

PRISON

SENTENCES

DEMOCRATIC 20 3 1 1
REPUBLICAN 28 120 89 34

Some might try to argue that this unfairly penalizes Republican administrations because GOP administrations held office for eight more years than Democratic administrations during this time period. The huge gap between the numbers shows how ridiculous that is, but even so, let’s get the averages per year of combined administrations:

AVERAGE EXECUTIVE BRANCH CRIMINAL ACTIONS BY YEAR SINCE 1968
ADMINISTRATION

AVERAGE #

INDICTMENTS

PER YEAR

AVERAGE #

CONVICTIONS

PER YEAR

AVERAGE #

IMPRISONMENTS

PER YEAR

DEMOCRATIC 0.15 0.05 0.05
REPUBLICAN 4.29 3.18 1.21

 

 

Even when we standardize it by getting annual averages, GOP administrations still have 29 times more indictments, 64 times more convictions, and 24 times more prison sentences. 

There's a reason benson doesn't include a link.   :)

 

There's not enough bandwidth to post all the convicted dems on this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During an interview on Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace noted that Mulvaney laughed when he viewed a video clip of acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker being disrespectful to House Oversight Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY).

 

"Go ahead," Wallace encouraged. "People will see you laughing at that."

 

 

 

and the rednecks wonder why their POS is at 36%...and 60% of America want him Impeached

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, benson13 said:

your POS and his Crooked Family & Admin are going DOWN!

You are going down on Hillary's ass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×