Too bad she isn't gay

[Doc]

then it would be a violation of her civil rights

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...ys-report.html

[Doc]

for those unable to get to the link...Sarah Sanders, Donald Trump's Press Secretary was refused service and asked to leave a DC restaurant because the restaurant wanted to uphold their moral standard, and they consider the current administration inhumane and unethical.

I see this as quite an interesting juxtaposition and am anxious to see if the ACLU and others rush to her defense like they do when a flower arranger or cake maker uses the same excuse to deny service for a gay wedding. I suspect I'll be waiting a very very long time.

To her credit, Sanders, who I personally find extremely annoying, left without a fuss. Unlike Adam and Steve, she didn't push the issue and went elsewhere where she and her money were welcome. Also, unlike Adam and Steve, she isn't playing the victim card nor will she get the backing of those who claim to be about equality because its not and never was or will be, at least for politicians.

Its things like this that make me NOT support hate crimes and "equality" legislation. I have no issue with the business not wanting her there if that is their choice, regardless of the reason. But if we as a nation have decided that a business can not decide who they render service to based on the owners moral judgements then apply it across the board

[KeithKSR]

The left is unhinged.

[bigsky]

She tweeted a response to a story hitting the social media which was broken by an employe of the restaurant and quickly going viral. She didnt compare being refused service to a civil rights issue; she left, then responded to the story as a PR person should. It wasnt an attack on the restaurant, after all, why wouldnt the restaurant owner be proud of her strong principled stance to refuse service to anyone and welcome the publicity?

[CitizenBBN]

The left is unhinged.

Their leadership has worked very hard to paint Trump and anyone who supports him as radical, even evil and not worthy of consideration. it's small wonder then when it works.

The problem is it's just not true. I've asked on here many times for one actual thing Trump has done in office that is outside the norms of a Presidential administration and gotten no reply. The reason is there isn't anything. Family separations? Been going on for decades at the border, so much so the first picture tweeted about it was from the Obama era. The economy? nothing there. Foreign policy? Nothing there.

About the worst we get is "he praises dictators". You mean like Obama going and praising Castro? Or when Saddam was our ally and we praised him? Or Marcos or any one of dozens of such people in the post WWII era?

Trump has done nothing "radical" or "evil" while President, nor has he proposed anything that fits those confines. Some may argue this or that policy is immoral or wrong, that's OK, but none of those policies are really out of the norm of past administrations. Obama was setting records for deportations on one side while signalling "come on down" on the other, and of course all the prior administrations did the same things.

But the left has convinced people he's "undermining democracy" in some way, despite absolutely no such evidence. He attacks the media, which suddenly is now somehow undermining a free press. I had no idea a "free press" meant "free to say whatever they want without being questioned". It doesn't, and Trump is right to call out this unabashed bias in the media.

When all of these people are convinced Trump is evil, that he's a real threat to our nation, it quickly allows the ends to justify the means, which is the real threat to our democracy. it's OK for the FBI to be biased against Trump, it's OK for Trump supporters to be kicked out of public business places, etc. b/c of their beliefs and b/c Trump is evil.

It's an incredibly dangerous road to go down, and particularly ironic for those who agree but yet call for a return to civility in our discussions. The way that works is to take the high road, not take an eye for an eye.

Trump is childish and insulting, but he's not evil, nor is his press secretary. This demonization the Left does on everyone is no different from when those on the right call everyone who is liberal a Communist, and in the end it only makes everything worse.

[KeithKSR]

This morning I saw some liberals protesting at one of the border processing facilities. Some idiot tries to stop a bus bound to one of the detention areas wanting the illegals to stop being treated like criminals. The problem with that logic is that they are indeed criminals and have violated federal laws by trying to sneak into the country.

A decade or so ago there were a number of politicians forced to resign when it was found some of their hired help were illegal immigrants. Now we have politicians openly encouraging violation of the federal laws they took an oath to uphold.

[CitizenBBN]

Of course many are saying this is just GREAT! Maxine Waters among them, but also talking heads on the usual propaganda frequencies at CNN and MSNBC.

It's OK to harass and shout down people for their political views now, b/c again Trump is an exception.

There was a time people were denied service in restaurants b/c it was "immoral" to serve them.

It isn't just Trump people who are creating this division and discord, and it's going to get worse before it gets better. Acting as if anyone who supports Trump is evil is a very very dangerous path.

The first thing you do when you want to go kill other people in a war is to vilify them and de-humanize them and make them some faceless mass that is evil and wrong and immoral.

This lady is a wife and mother, who loves her kids and goes home and bakes cookies and worries about their grades and soccer schedules just like every other mom. When people come out and say it's OK to commit shaming like the Scarlett Letter on her b/c she happens to disagree politically, we are undermining everything this nation is trying to achieve.

De-humanizing anyone for their views, even if we find them deeply offensive, is fundamentally wrong. What do we do with the abortion debate in light of this newfound punishment paradigm of the Left? There are many who feel abortion is murder, many millions of Americans in fact. They see abortion to be just as immoral as anything anyone thinks of Trumps' border immigration policy.

They have protested abortion facilities, is it now OK to protest the doctors and staff at their homes, to follow them to restaurants?

is the left OK with that behavior? Social terrorism leading to the change they want? Are they sure they want that to be the new norm of American political disagreement?

[Doc]

She tweeted a response to a story hitting the social media which was broken by an employe of the restaurant and quickly going viral. She didnt compare being refused service to a civil rights issue; she left, then responded to the story as a PR person should. It wasnt an attack on the restaurant, after all, why wouldnt the restaurant owner be proud of her strong principled stance to refuse service to anyone and welcome the publicity?

andthe left is now accusing her of misuse of official time and resources since the twitter was her government account, and she used it to "make a personal attack". I keep looking for the link

[Catonahottinroof]

Its not only social terrorism, it’s social Marxism.

Of course many are saying this is just GREAT! Maxine Waters among them, but also talking heads on the usual propaganda frequencies at CNN and MSNBC.

It's OK to harass and shout down people for their political views now, b/c again Trump is an exception.

There was a time people were denied service in restaurants b/c it was "immoral" to serve them.

It isn't just Trump people who are creating this division and discord, and it's going to get worse before it gets better. Acting as if anyone who supports Trump is evil is a very very dangerous path.

The first thing you do when you want to go kill other people in a war is to vilify them and de-humanize them and make them some faceless mass that is evil and wrong and immoral.

This lady is a wife and mother, who loves her kids and goes home and bakes cookies and worries about their grades and soccer schedules just like every other mom. When people come out and say it's OK to commit shaming like the Scarlett Letter on her b/c she happens to disagree politically, we are undermining everything this nation is trying to achieve.

De-humanizing anyone for their views, even if we find them deeply offensive, is fundamentally wrong. What do we do with the abortion debate in light of this newfound punishment paradigm of the Left? There are many who feel abortion is murder, many millions of Americans in fact. They see abortion to be just as immoral as anything anyone thinks of Trumps' border immigration policy.

They have protested abortion facilities, is it now OK to protest the doctors and staff at their homes, to follow them to restaurants?

is the left OK with that behavior? Social terrorism leading to the change they want? Are they sure they want that to be the new norm of American political disagreement?

[UKHistory]

This is an important story to note how we as a country are processing very emotional and sincere differences in US foreign and domestic policy. How we resolve these differences will say as much about our country going forward as the policies themselves.

Ms. Sanders was asked to leave the Red Hen restaurant in Lexington, Virginia (not DC proper; not a DC suburb; but an actual anti-Trump stronghold in the South which is quite rare).

By all accounts Ms. Sanders and her party were doing nothing wrong to warrant being asked to leave. All restaurants have signs that they reserve the right not to serve someone. However, short of antics that are ruining the dining experience (her physical presence is not appropriate justification) Ms. Sanders should have been welcomed and respected as all paying customers should be.

The owner of the Red Hen was wrong and rude to ask her to leave her restaurant. Her staff making the encounter publicly known via facebook is a gloating move that also is in poor taste. As Ms. Sanders was thrown out due to her official government capacity, I can't see using government furnished equipment to respond to the story as an improper use.

Congresswoman Waters urging the American people to verbally accost members of the Trump administration or chase them out of the public square, is also wrong. Shortsighted, counterproductive, true--but more importantly just wrong. And taken at face value, is not too unlike folks who would have denied service or even more menacingly let people of color know in no uncertain terms that they would be wise to not let the sun set on them in that town.

Urging someone to have sex with a meat cleaver is too wrong.

Of course the Sons of Liberty were wrong in tar and feathering tax collectors (a very physically painful humiliation) sent by King George III. I say this only to point out, that history has a tendency to smooth over the bad behavior of the good guys/winners.

Those who fear and oppose this administration are having a difficult time coming to grips with the best way to address a president who we feel is leading the country away from the Constitution and a nation of laws towards a more totalitarian regime. Those in opposition are not united in how to address our concerns. And cogent, logical arguments that are dismissed because of the Trump Cult of Personality and the double standards to support one's side regardless of the issue is more than disheartening. It is Orwellian. Left and right are Orwellian at times and both sides have been vilified by the other. Conservatives have been doing this longer and are far better at it than liberals. Today we have the internet but Rush had three hours a day every day for decades to mock and pound the liberal position. It worked--probably a little too good.

Governor Huckabee understandably stood up for his daughter through the arm of twitter over this a dad would. Be outraged your daughter was kicked out of a public place for doing her job. That is wrong. But calling the owner a bigot? Inaccurate. His choice of words accusing the Red Hen of bigotry is misplaced and hypocritical. Kentucky's most well known county clerk can use her faith to violate the law (and still keep her job that she treats like a family heirloom to be past down to the next generation) against a moral outrage and Huckabee stands with her, flies in to stand with her. Others stand by a baker unwilling to make a cake that he objects to on moral and religious grounds.

The Red Hen owner, again who was in the wrong, stood by her and her staff's moral principles against this administration and denied services to a customer. I get the rationale in both circumstances. I can see both sides. If you serve food for a living, serve food.

We need to keep the discourse civil but policy decisions have real life consequences for nations and individuals. The papers that governments shuffle, the regulations passed and voided, the laws and executive orders signed have real life consequences for people and the world.

That power and the impact of those decisions on human beings should compel the authors of those policies and those who are responsible for representing them in public to know they are responsible for them. Policies should be just. Simply following orders is not justification for doing wrong or permit wrong to take place. So you have to be aware that our deeds and words have consequences.

This president has at least twice publicly called for the due process of our legal system to be disregarded as an inconvenience. Once on the second amendment during a televised meeting with US senators and now at a "campaign" rally to dismiss the asylum complaints of folks who entered the country illegally.

I am sure people game the system, but the fact that rights of our citizens to be innocent until proven guilty and due process is afforded to all human beings in our borders is a great thing.

[KentuckyWildcat]

I keep trying to understand the left.....but I just can't. Have virtually given up trying.

[dan_bgblue]

Kevin McHale should have known better

[Doc]

History, not to cherry pick, but you stated "Those who fear and oppose this administration are having a difficult time coming to grips with the best way to address a president who we feel is leading the country away from the Constitution and a nation of laws towards a more totalitarian regime. Those in opposition are not united in how to address our concerns. And cogent, logical arguments that are dismissed because of the Trump Cult of Personality and the double standards to support one's side regardless of the issue is more than disheartening." and one could easily replace "TRUMP" with "OBAMA" and you would get exactly how many on the right felt during his reign. There were a few differences though. Any person who bucked Obama was automatically labelled a racist because only a racist would be against his policies. Second, most..not all but most, didn't see his reign as the end of the world and had some faith in the system, and that it would counter his attempts to do all that he wanted to do to create a nation of citizens wholly dependent upon the central government. Even those who disagreed with him for the most part treated him with respect due the leader of the nation and holder of the office. There were no severed heads that drew applause, no national celebs garnering ovations for "F##K Obama".....etc (of course doing so you have earned them the racist label), no rallies where they threatened to burn down the White House. Instead we had the IRS going after his enemies and crooked lying c##t's working in his cabinet. (oh sorry, can't use that word, that only applies to Trumps daughter..she's the only one of those). But in all seriousness, the right felt exactly the same way. It was NO different. Some acted childish about it but the degree upon which the left has gone is beyond reasonable. They make Trump look like a mature and sane grown up.

[Doc]

Kevin McHale should have known better

Good lord...that's not McHale, thats Fred Gwynne

[CitizenBBN]

first, I appreciate History's point about how this is not OK. I can split a few hairs about the difference between a baker and this situation, but I do agree the lady in Ky who wouldn't do her job and issue same sex marriage licenses was wrong and should have been fired. Her job is to follow the law, period.

Doc already addressed this part, but History the way you feel about Trump is the way many felt about Obama. One side or the other always struggles with the other side being in power, but your text to me implies my main point, that somehow Trump is so different that it's all somehow understandable.

The problem is, he's not any different. He called for curtailing due process of people re the gun issue, OK, I don't even agree with it, but that's our link to prove he's a totalitarian? Obama called for far worse, and there are two sitting Justices who think there's no right to self defense or gun ownership whatsoever. Those aren't "threats to democracy", those are differences of opinion. I think the 2nd amendment is a key part of preserving liberty, but I battle against those who disagree in the court of ideas, not with social terrorism.

So far we've had a mass shooting attack from a leftist on US Congressmen, numerous incidents like this one, and now elected officials, media talking heads and celebrities calling for it to be increased.

That's the threat to our nation, right there. Not Trump, who has done absolutely nothing any more "totalitarian" than any other President, not one single thing. It's those who are so convinced he is that threat, b/c if you believe in your soul the "other side" is evil and immoral, it's amazing what can be justified.

that's always the threat. It's OK to oppose anyone politically, but this level of hysteria is dangerous and wrong and downright against our principles as a nation, and in the greatest irony of them all it's exactly what the Russians were hoping would happen.

OK, the greatest irony of all is that it's going to get more Republicans elected and increase Trump's popularity, but the Russian thing is still highly ironic.

(and how will it help Trump? B/c compared to people like Maxine Waters he looks like the sane, reasonable choice. It takes a lot to make Trump look like the sane, reasonable guy in the room, but they're managing to do it.)

[Doc]

Does anybody recall how upset Maxine Waters was when members of Congress were confronted during the passage of the ACA, and how wrong that was. In yet another blatant hypocritical move, she now calls on people to do exactly the same to Trump supporters. See, its OK to for HER side to do it but it not be done to her. That is the part she and other far leftist fail. Like both History and CBBN noted, the lady in KY should have been fired for refusing to do her lawfully required job, period. Whether or not you agree with the stance, you are a government employee and you do your job. Well, so is Sarah Sanders. She to is a government employee. She follows the directives of her boss, Donald Trump. She is his Press Sec and it is her job to relay information. She does not make policy.

But where I have an issue is the restaurant refused service based on "MORAL STANDINGS". They feel the current administrations actions are unethical and immoral. That sounds exactly like the defense used by those who refused service to same sex marriage ceremonies. They believe the act is morally wrong. We have laws the prohibit them from refusing service based on discrimination. This is the reason I'm against these type of laws, and "hate crime" laws. A law is a law, regardless of your sexual orientation, gender, color, etc. Its shouldn't be worse because you gay, or a female or your religion or your nationality, etc. Personally I believe if a restaurant does not want to serve you for whatever reason, so be it. GO ELSEWHERE. I don't want to support such a place. Hell, put a sign in the window that says "WE DON'T SERVE REPUBLICANS"...fine with me. Or one that says "WE DON'T SERVE GAYS, OR AFRICAN AMERICANS" (I'm neither) so I can go elsewhere.

[UKHistory]

Some folks said the same thing about Obama as I do about Trump. I get that. And I have never felt this way about any other president. I sure I hope don't feel this way again. I do feel that the defense of a leader who care little and knows less about the Constitution is a danger. This is especially so when the Republican Party is more about Trump than the ideals of the GOP. This President lies more than any and I didn't think that was possible after 8 years of Clinton and longer with his wife. If you say he is just joking about his connection with dictators, I'd encourage him to stop joking.

I will come back and say I am wrong if we are still here and he leaves peacefully. I listen to his words and they frighten me. And I think they should frighten all Americans. I just have to figure out a way to be more persuasive. Or he does something really stupid and you join me.

There are certainly things about Obama and Hillary that deserve criticism. Arrogance and inexperience are dangerous. They are out of the way and can't hurt us. That is why my focus is where it is.

And for everyday Americans, there are legitimate policy decisions that seem to work against the middle class and the eroding of the American Dream. While the elites don't care about those of us in the middle and are rather snobbish, I would say supporting this particular horse is a bad bet. A man that evicts little old ladies is not the voice of the common man.

What I try to do, and I can only speak for myself, is be consistent in what I want for this country and its citizens. While Obama and W were silent on Russia, my heart has been true on that enemy. While I have concerns about globalism, America's alliances with NATO and particularly the English speaking countries of the world who share a common ancestry in terms of their political systems should not be discounted. They have kept us safe(er) and the Russians at bay. We need that alliance. Even super powers have their limitations and we need to find ways to modify our relationship where there are inequities addressed without berating and belittling allies. I am pro NATO and anti Russia and China.

We must fight terrorism and combat our enemies but not lose our liberty in the process. The Patriot Act, DHS, etc endangers our liberty.

Illegal immigration has been a problem for a long time. The rich in both parties benefited from exploiting these folks. We need to discuss immigration reform. But we must realize the reality, especially along the border, we are talking about people. We need thoughtful plans on how to do this. We should not forget to prioritize real criminals over those who have a committed crime by entering the country illegally. We should also recognize that they are committing a crime to flee violence or to seek a better economic opportunity for their families.

We have celebrated criminals for that. Heck we celebrate English traitors for that.

We need fixes. We need border security enhanced, but I question the feasibility of a wall (Trump references saving money when Russia kicks out State Dept employees and cites not conducting war games as good financial decisions?) I question the fiscal responsibility for holding these people as opposed to catching and releasing or transporting them to Canada. I do legitimately wonder about the lack of planning of what to do with children once separated from their families. Financially transporting children across the country and holding them is far more financially taxing than driving back across the River.

Internment camps, long terms prisons, for profit prisons--none of these really represent what America should be.

We do have some common ground. We also want a safe and prosperous country. We all love this country. I just want to make sure we don't wind up goose stepping in unison--or else--as opposed to being allowed to march to the beat of our own drummer.

I

[KeithKSR]

History, I think your fears about Trump are unfounded. He hasn’t gone rogue on anything at all. He has abided by any court rulings and has been very restrained in his use of the EO. On the flip side Obama, his pen and his phone were slapped down multiple times by SCOTUS for overstepping his bounds, and had DACA not been rescinded it too would have been stricken down by the courts.

In regards to your complaints about due process, Trump is maintaining that the laws that call for immediate deportation of Mexican and Canadian illegals should be applied to all illegal immigrants.

Dems like Maxine Waters scare me a lot more.

[CitizenBBN]

I sure I hope don't feel this way again. I do feel that the defense of a leader who care little and knows less about the Constitution is a danger.

I

Which is the same way I felt about Obama. I am convinced he is fundamentally anti-American and has no reverence whatsoever for the Constitution, as he deeply believes in the social justice model of the world, and the Constitution has nothing to do with social justice.

And so far I have far more proof of him undermining the Constitution than we have with Trump.

But let's set Obama aside. People see that as a diversion. let's pick some other Presidents. FDR tried to pack the Supreme Court. Lincoln threw the Constitution out the window during the Civil War. FDR and the Democratic Congress interred US citizens b/c they were Japanese.

Obama was having multiple executive actions struck down as unconstitutional. So did most every other Administration at one time or another.

There's simply absolutely not a single shred of anything to think Trump isn't following the same procedures. He has issued orders, they have been challenged, they've gone through the courts, rulings are made, and he's abided by every ruling. Nothing at all out of the norm.

His language is only inflammatory in the context of reading everything he says as being so out of bounds. It's self-fulfilling. Now he is childish and petulant and immature, and his personal attacks are cringe worthy.

But when you boil that off what is left is not anything different than what politicians say all the time. It's put more bluntly, and with less finesse, and that makes it more shocking, but so far nothing he's done or said is really very far out of the mainstream of political theater. It's just a lot more blunt.

For example on immigration, here is Obama as Senator: We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently and lawfully to become immigrants."

Seems pretty blunt to me, pretty clear, and not any different than what Trump has said. It's just that when Trump says it there's an assumption that he's doing it b/c he's racist and mean. When Senator Obama said it everything was fine.

So it's not his actions IMO that frighten so many, it's the, pardon the pun, trumped up propaganda campaign that has gotten people to filter everything he says and does with the assumption that he's doing it b/c he's a totalitarian lunatic. the problem is there's no evidence whatsoever that it has even a grain of truth. Peel that off and his comments are far less scary.

[UKHistory]

Citizen,

I think your position on Obama has some merit. The former President has a view of America and the western world's successful colonial and imperial manner of gaining resources that is not totally filled with pride.

I also think that the movers of shakers in and around government, I will sound conspiratorial here, work to take liberty away. I think a lot can be seen in Patriot Act following 911. And Trump is not certainly a part of that cabal. So some will see his presidency as a threat in those terms.

Thanks you for raising points about other presidents besides Barry. Your points on Lincoln and FDR are very well stated and accurate.

What did FRD and Lincoln have in common? Besides presiding over the country in two of its darkest hours. They died in office allowing them to be mourned as heroes--and not remembered as tyrants. Running for a fifth term, that was certainly on the agenda. And Lincoln saved the country and the world in truth but locked away the Constitution and even prosecuted war that legally the Union was the aggressor. The Confederacy's economic system was a hellish and truly unChristian deal with devil that we know as slavery. But everyone of those states had the right to leave on their own accord.

Both presidents, and I would say virtually every president dating back to Thomas Jefferson, has worked (regardless of motives) to expand the powers of the presidency. And Jefferson, prior to gaining office, was quite critical and wary of his predecessors for trying to assert that power.

So we have had presidents who have disregarded Mr. Washington's precedent, conveniently ignored the Constitution and gave into racist fears.

So what is the difference? A lot is in Trump's bluntness. I will take him at his words. They are profane, inarticulate, rude. They frighteningly show a clear ignorance of the Constitution and what it stands for. People cheer him for his ignorance too.

His rallies remind me of thugs in history. You might not see it or agree. And I could be wrong. But a man boasting of being able to murder someone while he urges his crowds to support locking up his political foe (And Hillary's email are a serious security problem, demonstrating poor judgment--only bested by a president yucking it up in the oval office with Russians sharing God knows what) is not one who is about law and order..

Barry's quote is one that is rational, thoughtful and reasonable. When one call them rapists, vermin who infest our country and not clearly differentiate between poor people and criminals one stokes hate towards others unnecessarily.

Reassessing immigration is not racist. It is not wrong. But when you align with far right wing European facists and clearly try to not even keep a lot of muslims on the sidelines, it is dangerous to our national security.

Tone and motivation and honesty matter. I won't just call him blunt; I will call him a bully. A lot of these guys aren't people I'd really want to spend with. W, maybe under the right circumstances. Clinton but he is a more subtle. With Trump, I don't have reason to debate that this man is a bully who would wipe his rear end with my Constitutional rights.

I also why most anyone in power lies, Trump lies more. Clinton tried to make money in office but nothing like this guy.

My primary rationale is one you and others dismiss which is Trump's clear high regard for Russia; I believe a close working relationship with the Russians in their efforts to subvert our election is grounds enough to oppose this man.

Paige and Stvork with their texts would make me suspicious of them too. You have read what I say and know where I work, you might be suspicious of me too. Through self selection there are far more FBI and military people who would have identified Republican and therefore been more supportive of Trump over Hillary. My understanding based on the IG report is that the New York office has some pro Trumpers there.

But the connection with the Russians (and Obama and McConnell and the system itself didn't want to discredit the elections and froze in fear) is too great for me to discount. The President's tone in how he speaks to our allies in NATO while praising Putin (plenty of Americans forgot the Cold War was still being waged in Moscow--they weren't berating Allies while praising Putin) worries me.

Needless to say I look forward to the report.

My concerns over cancelling the war games without proper consultation with his leadership and our allies (and from what I have read, they didn't know it was going to happen) is that it unwise policy that if Trump is beholden to the Russians is more than that. Far more. Any President could have had a meeting directly with North Korea. The difference is I am not sure anything concrete has been established save for the US not flexing its muscles in the South China Sea.

For the money we spend on defense, a war game is not necessarily where we look to cut coupons. Or corners in military readiness.

It isn't just his tone or bluntness. It is his exact word choice and clear regard for personal loyalty over loyalty to the Constitution.

I took an oath to defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. And domestic. It is a movie plot to have to ask oneself what do you do when the President stands against the Constitution or knowingly orders the Trojan Horse into the courtyard.

I am waiting and watching.

[KeithKSR]

History, I think you had far more to fear when Obama was in power. Weaponizing the alphabet agencies for his political gain was a very dangerous path.

Politicians are scared to death of Trump, because he is not one of them. He doesn’t have the same political baggage that can be leveraged by other politicians to get their way.

If the collusion info continues to unfold the way it is currently unfolding we are finding that the FBI operatives approached the Trump campaign offering to sell dirt on Hillary to them and didn’t get any nibbles, they then used the Steele dossier that the DNC and Hillary paid for to launch the investigation.