The Trump Dump!
Posted: Tue May 16, 2017 1:37 pm
All Trump, all the time. Bring your Trump related stuff here, and let the games begin!
Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
“In order for me to judge the appropriateness or not, I have to have context,” Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, said. “If it is in fact true that this information was shared with the Russian ambassador, it seems to me it’d be O.K. to be shared with U.S. senators.”
Senator Richard M. Burr of North Carolina, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, has requested that the White House provide information to the committee on the incident and had yet to hear a reply on Tuesday.
WASHINGTON — The classified intelligence that President Trump disclosed in a meeting last week with Russian officials at the White House was provided by Israel, according to a current and a former American official familiar with how the United States obtained the information. The revelation adds a potential diplomatic complication to the episode.
Israel is one of the United States’ most important allies and a major intelligence collector in the Middle East. The revelation that Mr. Trump boasted about some of Israel’s most sensitive information to the Russians could damage the relationship between the two countries. It also raises the possibility that the information could be passed to Iran, Russia’s close ally and Israel’s main threat in the Middle East.
What's worst that could happen? Israel stops giving us information after we damage their assets, every allied intelligence agency realizes we can't be trusted and the USA looks like a particular kind of buffoon to every foreign leader? How bad could that be?Kirbmarc wrote:Israel Said to Be Source of Secret Intelligence Trump Gave to Russians
WASHINGTON — The classified intelligence that President Trump disclosed in a meeting last week with Russian officials at the White House was provided by Israel, according to a current and a former American official familiar with how the United States obtained the information. The revelation adds a potential diplomatic complication to the episode.
Israel is one of the United States’ most important allies and a major intelligence collector in the Middle East. The revelation that Mr. Trump boasted about some of Israel’s most sensitive information to the Russians could damage the relationship between the two countries. It also raises the possibility that the information could be passed to Iran, Russia’s close ally and Israel’s main threat in the Middle East.
Yea - too many have a tendency to judge not just people but news organizations more by their "covers" than by their content - so to speak.Scented Nectar wrote:Well, whether people are impressed or not, Cernovich keeps getting things right. And no matter what any rags with names ending in "Times" are saying, Trump is very against radical islam. He has no problem with moderate islam though, in a live and let live way. At today's press release, McMaster said that Trump wanted to visit sites important to all 3 of the region's major religions. He also backed up the thing about extra info being leaked in addition to stuff from the meeting.Steersman wrote:Interesting. Gather some people, even some here ..., are not too impressed with Gorilla Mindset, but seems plausible. Bit of a "problematic" suggestion (early on at the beginning) that McMasters has hired a pro-Hamas supporter - not sure whether the "Intelligence" Community knows whether they are ["incoming cliche!"] on foot or horseback. Quite a good post in The Federalist about a year ago that emphasizes the point:Scented Nectar wrote:The latest... the leaker leaked more than Trump actually talked about during the meeting. The whitehouse is freaking out. The extra info was indeed classified and the leak has jeopardized some people. They are scrambling to fix that. They had to blast the tv in the press room so that the press wouldn't overhear the yelling after it started.
Mike Cernovich has a live stream. The link is temporary right now, but you can still rewind to the beginning while it's up and it'll stay up for a while after it's done. It's at:
[.youtube][/youtube]
The permanent copy will be posted later sometime at:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC87YBe ... w5tcCxsXgQHad hoped that Trump at least was prepared to recognize that Islam itself is the problem, but that seems moot:How President Obama Made Syria An Unfixable Quagmire
.... The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that Syrian opposition forces backed by the CIA and the Pentagon are now fighting each other. (Buzzfeed’s Mike Giglio actually wrote this story more than a month ago, with the simple but true headline: “America Is In A Proxy War With Itself In Syria.”) The Syrian conflagration has entered the phase where pretty much everyone shoots at everyone else ....
[tweet]]
Not that some aren't trying to get his attention - mules, two by fours up alongside the ears, and all that:Palestinians: The Threats Trump Needs to Hear
... A new policy document recently published by Hamas says that the Islamic terror movement accepts a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, but without recognizing Israel's right to exist. Translation: Hamas seeks a Palestinian state that would be used as a launching pad to destroy Israel. ....
[.youtube][/youtube]
Would be nice to know whether McMaster is seeing the error of his ways as he's been on record as rejecting any connection between Islam and terrorism. But I also wonder whether DJT realizes that "a peaceful vision of Islam" is a virtual contradiction in terms:Trump will speak to Muslim leaders in Saudi Arabia about radical Islam
President Trump will give a speech to Muslim leaders in Saudi Arabia about confronting radical Islam and will participate in opening a center committed to promoting moderation, national security adviser H.R. McMaster said Tuesday.
Trump leaves for his first foreign trip as president on Friday, which will start in Saudi Arabia.
McMaster said Trump would address leaders from 50 Muslim and Muslim-majority countries there, “where he will deliver an inspiring but direct speech on the need to confront radical ideology and the president’s hopes for a peaceful vision of Islam to dominate across the world.” ....
And you think it's just #fakenews that the WaPo leaker leaked far more than what Trump is accused of doing?Matt Cavanaugh wrote:McMaster is a career army guy and will instinctively fall on the sword to protect his boss. He was given a shit task and obfuscated to the max, but ultimately could not lie about the fact that trump blabbed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fac ... ba99ca168d
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... story.html
Scented Nectar wrote:The latest... the leaker leaked more than Trump actually talked about during the meeting. The whitehouse is freaking out. The extra info was indeed classified and the leak has jeopardized some people. They are scrambling to fix that. They had to blast the tv in the press room so that the press wouldn't overhear the yelling after it started.
Mike Cernovich has a live stream. The link is temporary right now, but you can still rewind to the beginning while it's up and it'll stay up for a while after it's done. It's at:
[youtube][/youtube]
The permanent copy will be posted later sometime at:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC87YBe ... w5tcCxsXgQ
I think he strongly knows what islam is all about. He's being diplomatic when it comes to the (relatively) moderate ones who are not trying to invade/destroy the west though, and there's also his belief in countries having their own sovereignty. I wouldn't be surprised if he maybe says something leaning on the charitable side about a possible reformation of islam, but he likely knows full well that it's bad to its core.Steersman wrote:Responding to a Scented Nectar post in the main thread [Post #13403]:
Yea - too many have a tendency to judge not just people but news organizations more by their "covers" than by their content - so to speak.Scented Nectar wrote:Well, whether people are impressed or not, Cernovich keeps getting things right. And no matter what any rags with names ending in "Times" are saying, Trump is very against radical islam. He has no problem with moderate islam though, in a live and let live way. At today's press release, McMaster said that Trump wanted to visit sites important to all 3 of the region's major religions. He also backed up the thing about extra info being leaked in addition to stuff from the meeting.
[.youtube][/youtube]
But agree about Trump and radical Islam, although I still think Trump doesn't know as much about Islam as he should, that it is virtually "irreformable" - as Anjuli Pandavar put it. Interesting though that DJT is supposed to be broaching the issue this Friday in Saudi Arabia:Would be nice to know whether McMaster is seeing the error of his ways as he's been on record as rejecting any connection between Islam and terrorism. But I also wonder whether DJT realizes that "a peaceful vision of Islam" is a virtual contradiction in terms:Trump will speak to Muslim leaders in Saudi Arabia about radical Islam
President Trump will give a speech to Muslim leaders in Saudi Arabia about confronting radical Islam and will participate in opening a center committed to promoting moderation, national security adviser H.R. McMaster said Tuesday.
Trump leaves for his first foreign trip as president on Friday, which will start in Saudi Arabia.
McMaster said Trump would address leaders from 50 Muslim and Muslim-majority countries there, “where he will deliver an inspiring but direct speech on the need to confront radical ideology and the president’s hopes for a peaceful vision of Islam to dominate across the world.” ....
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_6N4c3UAAATDdu.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_6N4c3UAAATDdu.jpg
He said in the press release today that the leak contained stuff in addition to what was discussed in the meeting, plus Mike Cernovich says this extra stuff is what was classified, not the meeting info. Plus, he said over and over that Trump did NOT say anything inappropriate during the meeting. So how are you getting to the conclusion that he said the opposite? Oh yeah, you keep getting it secondhand from biased msm with a track record for lying. Just watch the McMaster press releases, both the short outdoor one and the main indoors one today, and decide for yourself what was actually said. Get it straight from the McMaster horse's mouth. He did not say some of the stuff written in that first article - they made it up. Probably the second one too, although I didn't read it.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:McMaster is a career army guy and will instinctively fall on the sword to protect his boss. He was given a shit task and obfuscated to the max, but ultimately could not lie about the fact that trump blabbed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fac ... ba99ca168d
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... story.html
I linked to that in the other thread. Kind of explains why Trump said Comey better have tapes or watch out. He knew this was coming and is going to do a he said-he said swear off hoping Comey doesn't have any evidence to corroborate his story. This is the obstruction of justice possibility I was talking about earlier. Now even Chaffetz wants to dig into this. More fireworks to come.John D wrote:Haha... New Trump shit tonight. There is supposedly a Comey note where he wrote that Trump said he would like the Mike Flynn investigation to go away. So far, Comey did not surface the note.... someone acting in Comey's behalf did this.
Even Fox news is kicking Trumps ass on this story.
Crazy shit. The notes could be a total fake, but it seems unlikely to me. It would not surprise me if Trump would pressure Comey to drop an investigation.
The WaPo article directly quotes McMaster, then points out his evasiveness. What McMaser avoids saying is more revealing than his weasel-words:Scented Nectar wrote:He said in the press release today that the leak contained stuff in addition to what was discussed in the meeting, plus Mike Cernovich says this extra stuff is what was classified, not the meeting info. Plus, he said over and over that Trump did NOT say anything inappropriate during the meeting. So how are you getting to the conclusion that he said the opposite? Oh yeah, you keep getting it secondhand from biased msm with a track record for lying. Just watch the McMaster press releases, both the short outdoor one and the main indoors one today, and decide for yourself what was actually said. Get it straight from the McMaster horse's mouth. He did not say some of the stuff written in that first article - they made it up. Probably the second one too, although I didn't read it.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:McMaster is a career army guy and will instinctively fall on the sword to protect his boss. He was given a shit task and obfuscated to the max, but ultimately could not lie about the fact that trump blabbed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fac ... ba99ca168d
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... story.html
You've gone full Breitbart, Scented. Never go full Breitbart.Either Trump was talking about a topic he knew about -- and knew he needed to be careful as to what he could say -- or he was freelancing with a piece of information he didn't really know the full story on.
Seriously? You're quoting the Washedout Compost and the Clinton News Network while telling me not to go full Breitbart? I'd much rather be full Breitbart than what you're doing.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:The WaPo article directly quotes McMaster, then points out his evasiveness. What McMaser avoids saying is more revealing than his weasel-words:Scented Nectar wrote:He said in the press release today that the leak contained stuff in addition to what was discussed in the meeting, plus Mike Cernovich says this extra stuff is what was classified, not the meeting info. Plus, he said over and over that Trump did NOT say anything inappropriate during the meeting. So how are you getting to the conclusion that he said the opposite? Oh yeah, you keep getting it secondhand from biased msm with a track record for lying. Just watch the McMaster press releases, both the short outdoor one and the main indoors one today, and decide for yourself what was actually said. Get it straight from the McMaster horse's mouth. He did not say some of the stuff written in that first article - they made it up. Probably the second one too, although I didn't read it.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:McMaster is a career army guy and will instinctively fall on the sword to protect his boss. He was given a shit task and obfuscated to the max, but ultimately could not lie about the fact that trump blabbed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fac ... ba99ca168d
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati ... story.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/16/politics/ ... ssia-leak/
You've gone full Breitbart, Scented. Never go full Breitbart.Either Trump was talking about a topic he knew about -- and knew he needed to be careful as to what he could say -- or he was freelancing with a piece of information he didn't really know the full story on.
"Appropriate" is an opinion, not a fact. The senior WH staff who immediately did damage control thought otherwise. Whoever talked to the WaPo thought otherwise. The Israelis sure think otherwise. Everybody but McMaster thinks otherwise:Scented Nectar wrote:The only thing he avoided was saying WHICH things were or were not classified. He answered the important thing which was that everything Trump discussed during that meeting was appropriate. He's most likely not allowed to say which parts of the extra, non-meeting, leaked info were classified.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... ks-furtherA senior European intelligence official told The Associated Press that his country might stop sharing information with the U.S. if it confirms Trump’s disclosure because it “could be a risk for our sources.”
In Germany, a senior lawmaker told the AP that if the president “passes [exclusive and highly sensitive] information to other governments at will, then Trump becomes a security risk for the entire Western world.”
Silvio Berlusconi said the exact same thing back when he was accused of false accounting (he changed the law not to go to jail before he was convicted). Trump isn't Hitler, he's Berlusconi's American cousin.free thoughtpolice wrote:[youtube][/youtube]
LoL. Seems the "blue pills" have had some "doctoring" too:free thoughtpolice wrote:I think someone has been slipping acid into the red pills lately. :whistle:
Denmark, rot, etc.Comey's revenge is a gun without powder
Gregg Jarrett (Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney)
James Comey was lying in wait.
His gun was cocked, he took aim and fired. But his weapon was empty.
Three months ago, the then-FBI Director met with President Trump. Following their private conversation, Comey did what he always does –he wrote a memorandum to himself memorializing the conversation. Good lawyers do that routinely.
Now, only after Comey was fired, the memo magically surfaces in an inflammatory New York Times report which alleges that Mr. Trump asked Comey to end the Michael Flynn investigation.
Those who don’t know the first thing about the law immediately began hurling words like “obstruction of justice”, “high crimes and misdemeanors” and “impeachment“. Typically, these people don’t know what they don’t know.
Here is what we do know.
Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.
So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ? If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it.
<snip>
But by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box. If he now accuses the President of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it. If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the president of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him.
Either way, James Comey comes out a loser. No matter. The media will hail him a hero.
After all, he gave them a good story that was better than the truth.
Respected and trustworthy?!?!?!?!?!?!? Sure it is. :lol: No need to get triggered by me calling it names, ok? We wuvs our Posty-wosty. Those are just pet names I was using. Compost is good and green and makes Mommy Earth happy. And Washedout means washing and re-using things instead of throwing them out and wastefully buying new ones. Reduce! Re-use! Recycle! That's what I was taught.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:"Appropriate" is an opinion, not a fact. The senior WH staff who immediately did damage control thought otherwise. Whoever talked to the WaPo thought otherwise. The Israelis sure think otherwise. Everybody but McMaster thinks otherwise:Scented Nectar wrote:The only thing he avoided was saying WHICH things were or were not classified. He answered the important thing which was that everything Trump discussed during that meeting was appropriate. He's most likely not allowed to say which parts of the extra, non-meeting, leaked info were classified.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-secu ... ks-furtherA senior European intelligence official told The Associated Press that his country might stop sharing information with the U.S. if it confirms Trump’s disclosure because it “could be a risk for our sources.”
In Germany, a senior lawmaker told the AP that if the president “passes [exclusive and highly sensitive] information to other governments at will, then Trump becomes a security risk for the entire Western world.”
Your blind trump apologetics is getting Aneris-pipe-laying level bizarre. And stop calling it the Washington "Compost". WaPo is a respected and trustworthy paper, far more so than shitty Breitbart or that conspiracy nut, Cernovich, whose fabrications you keep repeating.
"Following their private conversation, Comey did what he always does –he wrote a memorandum to himself memorializing the conversation."Steersman wrote:LoL. Seems the "blue pills" have had some "doctoring" too:free thoughtpolice wrote:I think someone has been slipping acid into the red pills lately. :whistle:Denmark, rot, etc.Comey's revenge is a gun without powder
Gregg Jarrett (Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney)
James Comey was lying in wait.
His gun was cocked, he took aim and fired. But his weapon was empty.
Three months ago, the then-FBI Director met with President Trump. Following their private conversation, Comey did what he always does –he wrote a memorandum to himself memorializing the conversation. Good lawyers do that routinely.
Now, only after Comey was fired, the memo magically surfaces in an inflammatory New York Times report which alleges that Mr. Trump asked Comey to end the Michael Flynn investigation.
Those who don’t know the first thing about the law immediately began hurling words like “obstruction of justice”, “high crimes and misdemeanors” and “impeachment“. Typically, these people don’t know what they don’t know.
Here is what we do know.
Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.
So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ? If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it.
<snip>
But by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box. If he now accuses the President of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it. If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the president of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him.
Either way, James Comey comes out a loser. No matter. The media will hail him a hero.
After all, he gave them a good story that was better than the truth.
As I noted above, Comey did report the meeting to other FBI agents.Not only did he fail to report it, but when he makes excuses of it not being real, and when Trump's tapes are released and contradict Comey's notes to himself, it leaves him in more trouble for fabricating evidence and for trying to frame the president as well. That's fucking hilarious! :D
This is shaping up to be very similar to Watergate. I'd say that an independent investigation is a good thing to find out what's true and what's not. If Trump is actually not guilty of anything at this point he should welcome the appointed of a special prosecutor.free thoughtpolice wrote:In more Trump news:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/1 ... obe-238524
Special prosecutor appointed to investigate the Russian thing.
I'm almost certain that it was taped and that the contents will be on Trump's side. What's my source?free thoughtpolice wrote:As for Comey writing that memo and "not informing the DOJ":
I'm not a lawyer and the quote that Steers left didn't link to the laws cited so I don't know whether Comey could be in trouble for improper reporting. I've seen a few argue that he is (typically heavy duty Trump supporters) and more that he isn't. Comey took notes, shared them with fellow FBI officers and entered it into evidence along with other documents pertaining to the Russian probe. Other FBI have opined that this is accepted practice. Remember that the FBI is a part of the DOJ so the fact that he memorialized this may count as notifying the DOJ. Also, Comey may have decided that that meeting by itself and the requests made did not by themselves to rise to the level of obstruction and wouldn't require reporting to higher ups.
If it occurred and Comey broke the law by not reporting it, that wouldn't make Trump not guilty so the Trumpettes shouldn't dance for joy quite yet.
Scented Nectar wrote:As I noted above, Comey did report the meeting to other FBI agents.Not only did he fail to report it, but when he makes excuses of it not being real, and when Trump's tapes are released and contradict Comey's notes to himself, it leaves him in more trouble for fabricating evidence and for trying to frame the president as well. That's fucking hilarious! :D
You have knowledge that Trump taped the meeting and know what's on the tapes? Which impeccable source gave you that info?
It's possible that Trump believes that Comey would also have incriminated himself by not reporting the obstruction of justice to the FBI, so he hoped he keep his mouth shut. It's also possible that Comey actually found a way to not incriminate himself, which Trump didn't think about since he's not an expert of FBI laws. We'll see.Scented Nectar wrote:I'm almost certain that it was taped and that the contents will be on Trump's side. What's my source?
I doubt he'd remind Comey that there's a tape if what was talked about over dinner turned out to be against himself. The contents of the tape will be in his favour.
Me too! It's the best way to shed some light on what happened. If Trump has nothing to hide he'll be glad to let people listen to the rapes.I'd love for the tapes to come out. Not just a transcript but the actual audio where we can hear vocal inflections and everything.
My guess is that Trump won't be happy about this. He has no control over this guy and can't fire him without likely getting impeached. He wants it over quickly where it probably won't and will likely be investigated in detail, possibly bringing embarrassing or criminal behavior that is only tangential to the email leaking case into the open where it would otherwise not.This is shaping up to be very similar to Watergate. I'd say that an independent investigation is a good thing to find out what's true and what's not. If Trump is actually not guilty of anything at this point he should welcome the appointed of a special prosecutor.
Exactly. As I said if Trump is really not guilty of anything an independent investigation will exonerate him and even strengthen him. If he's guilty of something then it will come out. There no downsides for the American public from this development.free thoughtpolice wrote:My guess is that Trump won't be happy about this. He has no control over this guy and can't fire him without likely getting impeached. He wants it over quickly where it probably won't and will likely be investigated in detail, possibly bringing embarrassing or criminal behavior that is only tangential to the email leaking case into the open where it would otherwise not.This is shaping up to be very similar to Watergate. I'd say that an independent investigation is a good thing to find out what's true and what's not. If Trump is actually not guilty of anything at this point he should welcome the appointed of a special prosecutor.
The good news for Trump is that Mueller is regarded as nonpartisan and unlikely to mount the sort of political crusade that Starr did to Clinton. If there is no there there Trump will be treated fairly and having an independent, highly regarded investigator exonerate will clear him in a way that wouldn't happen if one of his stooges conduct the investigation.
I'd like it if there were tapes too. If there are, Trump will have to turn them over to investigators.Scented Nectar wrote:I'm almost certain that it was taped and that the contents will be on Trump's side. What's my source?free thoughtpolice wrote:As for Comey writing that memo and "not informing the DOJ":
I'm not a lawyer and the quote that Steers left didn't link to the laws cited so I don't know whether Comey could be in trouble for improper reporting. I've seen a few argue that he is (typically heavy duty Trump supporters) and more that he isn't. Comey took notes, shared them with fellow FBI officers and entered it into evidence along with other documents pertaining to the Russian probe. Other FBI have opined that this is accepted practice. Remember that the FBI is a part of the DOJ so the fact that he memorialized this may count as notifying the DOJ. Also, Comey may have decided that that meeting by itself and the requests made did not by themselves to rise to the level of obstruction and wouldn't require reporting to higher ups.
If it occurred and Comey broke the law by not reporting it, that wouldn't make Trump not guilty so the Trumpettes shouldn't dance for joy quite yet.
Scented Nectar wrote:As I noted above, Comey did report the meeting to other FBI agents.Not only did he fail to report it, but when he makes excuses of it not being real, and when Trump's tapes are released and contradict Comey's notes to himself, it leaves him in more trouble for fabricating evidence and for trying to frame the president as well. That's fucking hilarious! :D
You have knowledge that Trump taped the meeting and know what's on the tapes? Which impeccable source gave you that info?
I doubt he'd remind Comey that there's a tape if what was talked about over dinner turned out to be against himself. The contents of the tape will be in his favour. And of course Trump has to tape everything considering how many people try to fuck him over. I figure it's routine for him at this point.
And how long did Comey wait between the dinner and reporting his concerns? I'd love for the tapes to come out. Not just a transcript but the actual audio where we can hear vocal inflections and everything.
That's quite a stretch. Everything points to him having the tapes and not bluffing. It would serve no purpose to bluff over something like this if there actually was anything improper in the conversation. They were both there, so how would any bluff work? Comey could just say, "ok show the tapes and there will be the improper stuff you said", so mentioning the tapes only would work if Trump's part of the conversation was completely fine.free thoughtpolice wrote: I'd like it if there were tapes too. If there are, Trump will have to turn them over to investigators.
I think he doesn't have tapes of it. It sounds like Trump knows he has asked inappropriate things of Comey and is signalling him here to try and keep him quiet. Bluffing by a loud mouth bully.
You better not leak
you better not lie
you better not talk
I'm telling you why
Dirty Donald will fuck you up
Seems you and many others tend to view Fox & Breitbart the way many Christians view zombies - requiring the liberal application of holy water, wooden stakes, and crucifixes - but you could always risk your soul(s) and try reading the article, ;-) to wit:free thoughtpolice wrote:As for Comey writing that memo and "not informing the DOJ":
I'm not a lawyer and the quote that Steers left didn't link to the laws cited so I don't know whether Comey could be in trouble for improper reporting. ....
Given that the guy is apparently an actual defense lawyer, you might want to consider that he might know whereof he speaks.Jarrett wrote:Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.
LoL. No doubt some "Trumpettes" - "hey, hey, what do you say there, DeeJay? How many journalists did you fry today?" - are "dancing with joy". But while I and many other "supporters" of him are not so besotted as to insist that he can do no wrong, I expect many realize that he's still - currently at least - the lesser of the two evils, even in comparison to many of the alternatives among the Republicans. You really think that any others could have precipitated as much necessary soul-searching as he has done already, particularly relative to Islam, immigration, and SJW dogma? You think it wouldn't be business as usual if he's turfed?free thoughtpolice wrote:If it occurred and Comey broke the law by not reporting it, that wouldn't make Trump not guilty so the Trumpettes shouldn't dance for joy quite yet.
I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!Kirbmarc wrote:Exactly. As I said if Trump is really not guilty of anything an independent investigation will exonerate him and even strengthen him. If he's guilty of something then it will come out. There no downsides for the American public from this development.free thoughtpolice wrote:My guess is that Trump won't be happy about this. He has no control over this guy and can't fire him without likely getting impeached. He wants it over quickly where it probably won't and will likely be investigated in detail, possibly bringing embarrassing or criminal behavior that is only tangential to the email leaking case into the open where it would otherwise not.This is shaping up to be very similar to Watergate. I'd say that an independent investigation is a good thing to find out what's true and what's not. If Trump is actually not guilty of anything at this point he should welcome the appointed of a special prosecutor.
The good news for Trump is that Mueller is regarded as nonpartisan and unlikely to mount the sort of political crusade that Starr did to Clinton. If there is no there there Trump will be treated fairly and having an independent, highly regarded investigator exonerate will clear him in a way that wouldn't happen if one of his stooges conduct the investigation.
That means that you think Trump is happy about the SP?I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!
That's not what I said, though. What I said is that regardless of whether Trump is guilty or not, happy about the Special Prosecutor or not, the time for stalling is over and we'll get to know the truth. The public needs to know, the "media say Trump says" narrative has only polarized the country. The reveal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.John D wrote:I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!
Probadly not, sadly. The 9/11 commission still had the "inside job" whackos. It will be a good thing nonetheless.Kirbmarc wrote: Snip
The seal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.
Nutters gotta nut, but eventually after the dust settles people move on. The Truthers are yesterday's news, even Alex Jones has moved on.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Probadly not, sadly. The 9/11 commission still had the "inside job" whackos. It will be a good thing nonetheless.Kirbmarc wrote: Snip
The seal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.
Yes, Trump has never overeacted to a threat and done something dumb. Or maybe that's his MO, hard to say.Scented Nectar wrote:That's quite a stretch. Everything points to him having the tapes and not bluffing. It would serve no purpose to bluff over something like this if there actually was anything improper in the conversation. They were both there, so how would any bluff work? Comey could just say, "ok show the tapes and there will be the improper stuff you said", so mentioning the tapes only would work if Trump's part of the conversation was completely fine.free thoughtpolice wrote: I'd like it if there were tapes too. If there are, Trump will have to turn them over to investigators.
I think he doesn't have tapes of it. It sounds like Trump knows he has asked inappropriate things of Comey and is signalling him here to try and keep him quiet. Bluffing by a loud mouth bully.
You better not leak
you better not lie
you better not talk
I'm telling you why
Dirty Donald will fuck you up
I think Trump is a fighter. I am not exactly saying he is "happy". I don't know if he is ever "happy." He is going to be in fight mode.Kirbmarc wrote:That's not what I said, though. What I said is that regardless of whether Trump is guilty or not, happy about the Special Prosecutor or not, the time for stalling is over and we'll get to know the truth. The public needs to know, the "media say Trump says" narrative has only polarized the country. The reveal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.John D wrote:I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!
You're assuming the man is rational. He's completely, mentally insane.Kirbmarc wrote:That's not what I said, though. What I said is that regardless of whether Trump is guilty or not, happy about the Special Prosecutor or not, the time for stalling is over and we'll get to know the truth. The public needs to know, the "media say Trump says" narrative has only polarized the country. The reveal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.John D wrote:I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!
A reasoning person would chalk that up to paranoia, like with Nixon. But you go on and play the doting mommy that Donald never had.Scented Nectar wrote: And of course Trump has to tape everything considering how many people try to fuck him over. I figure it's routine for him at this point.
I don't care about Trump as a person. I care about già institutional role. Regardless of Trump's mental health it's good that the truth come out. If Trump tries to do something crazy he'd get himself unto even more trouble. I think he'll stay put for now, or at least that his staff will make him stay put.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:You're assuming the man is rational. He's completely, mentally insane.Kirbmarc wrote:That's not what I said, though. What I said is that regardless of whether Trump is guilty or not, happy about the Special Prosecutor or not, the time for stalling is over and we'll get to know the truth. The public needs to know, the "media say Trump says" narrative has only polarized the country. The reveal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.John D wrote:I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!
LMAO. Trump's entire existence has been bluff.Scented Nectar wrote: That's quite a stretch. Everything points to him having the tapes and not bluffing. It would serve no purpose to bluff over something like this if there actually was anything improper in the conversation.
I'm not triggered. You're just making yourself look foolish. Get a grip.Scented Nectar wrote: No need to get triggered by me calling it names, ok? We wuvs our Posty-wosty. Those are just pet names I was using. Compost is good and green and makes Mommy Earth happy. And Washedout means washing and re-using things instead of throwing them out and wastefully buying new ones. Reduce! Re-use! Recycle! That's what I was taught.
If they subpoena the tapes, then they'll subpoena the tapes. Why are you deciding ahead of it that he won't be able to produce them?free thoughtpolice wrote:Scented; If there are tapes we will likely know about it because the senate and others have asked for them and will subpoena them if they can't get them. If they exist and exonerate Trump he would release them now or very soon.
That makes me think they don't exist or are incriminating. If you are right we should know about the tapes and what they say soon or we would already know about them.
Give me a break. You can't even give a list showing he has some MO of overreacting to threats for starters, but it doesn't matter since you are just taking it off topic from the tapes / Comey situation. As for countering the points I made, well you didn't. All you did was change the topics to OTHER things you don't like about Trump.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Yes, Trump has never overeacted to a threat and done something dumb. Or maybe that's his MO, hard to say.Scented Nectar wrote:That's quite a stretch. Everything points to him having the tapes and not bluffing. It would serve no purpose to bluff over something like this if there actually was anything improper in the conversation. They were both there, so how would any bluff work? Comey could just say, "ok show the tapes and there will be the improper stuff you said", so mentioning the tapes only would work if Trump's part of the conversation was completely fine.free thoughtpolice wrote: I'd like it if there were tapes too. If there are, Trump will have to turn them over to investigators.
I think he doesn't have tapes of it. It sounds like Trump knows he has asked inappropriate things of Comey and is signalling him here to try and keep him quiet. Bluffing by a loud mouth bully.
You better not leak
you better not lie
you better not talk
I'm telling you why
Dirty Donald will fuck you up
You know, Trump has quite a documented history before he was president. From his own ghostwritten books to contemporaneous newspaper accounts. Before one assumes that Trump wouldn't do anything insanely stupid, you might want to research his rich and colorful history. From opening an unaccredited University that was a ripoff scheme to selling steaks through a big-box electronics store, the man has had his share of moments. And do be sure to look into his business partners, that can be illuminating.
And you're completely gullible. Do you even know WHY you have such a strong belief that he's insane? Think about it. Do you have anything other than automatic feelz due to being surrounded by all the msm telling you he's insane and displaying disgust at him? What's he actually done that says "he's insane" as opposed to "I disagree with him"?Matt Cavanaugh wrote:You're assuming the man is rational. He's completely, mentally insane.Kirbmarc wrote:That's not what I said, though. What I said is that regardless of whether Trump is guilty or not, happy about the Special Prosecutor or not, the time for stalling is over and we'll get to know the truth. The public needs to know, the "media say Trump says" narrative has only polarized the country. The reveal of the truth from an independent investigation will end the speculations on all sides.John D wrote:I agree with Kirb on this one. Trump is like... bring it!