President Trump

Tools    





Trump is under investigation by the FBI and now of all times he fires the FBI director... If someone isn't outraged, then what the heck would it take?! It seems clear as day Trump is trying to stifle the ongoing investigation. We all should be outraged. And past grievances about Comey don't matter. (Personally I always gave him the benefit of the doubt, but I know others didn't. Whatever.) This is a big deal.

And as a side note Sessions has recused himself from anything doing with any Clinton investigation and any investigation into Russian interference, yet reportedly he was involved in this decision. How much corruption are we going to tolerate?
__________________
I may go back to hating you. It was more fun.



I'm not old, you're just 12.
I'm definitely hoping that they find enough to impeach Trump and possibly his whole crew, really. As I've gotten older I've tried to find the good in both sides of the aisle, but it's impossible to find the good in Mr. Trump -r th people he surrounds himself with. He's an ill-prepared, hot tempered man-child who's in over his head, and his actions since being elected (s well as while he was campaigning) have been pretty deplorable.
__________________
"You, me, everyone...we are all made of star stuff." - Neil Degrasse Tyson

https://shawnsmovienight.blogspot.com/



Trump is under investigation by the FBI and now of all times he fires the FBI director... If someone isn't outraged, then what the heck would it take?! It seems clear as day Trump is trying to stifle the ongoing investigation. We all should be outraged. And past grievances about Comey don't matter. (Personally I always gave him the benefit of the doubt, but I know others didn't. Whatever.) This is a big deal.

And as a side note Sessions has recused himself from anything doing with any Clinton investigation and any investigation into Russian interference, yet reportedly he was involved in this decision. How much corruption are we going to tolerate?
What is your source that Trump personally is under investigation by the FBI?

This political farce gets loonier every day! After all these Democrats blasting Comey for months and alleging that he caused Hillary the election with several calling for his removal, now when Trump does exactly that they express outrage? As someone noted, “They give hypocrisy a bad name.” Then again, the left has always been noted for hypocrisy such as Hollywood degenerates crying over the plight of the “little guy” while they live like Indian rajahs. As the pre-repentant Ebenezer Scrooge so succinctly put it: “I shall retire to Bedlam.”



Trump Threatens Retaliation Against Comey, Warns He May Cancel Press Briefings


President Donald Trump unleashed a new round of tweets Friday morning as the fallout over FBI Director James Comey's firing continues.

President Trump on Friday warned James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director he fired this week, against leaking anything negative about the president and warned the news media that he may cancel all future White House briefings.

In a series of early-morning Twitter posts, Mr. Trump even seemed to suggest that there may be secret tapes of his conversations with Mr. Comey that could be used to counter the former F.B.I. director if necessary. It was not immediately clear whether he meant that literally or simply hoped to intimidate Mr. Comey into silence.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...ngs/ar-BBB3LPR



My casual $0.02 regarding Comey stuffs:
He has had a lot of spotlight first leading up to the election publicly commenting on Clinton's email investigation and then publicly contradicting Trump's tweeted claims of Obama's alleged wiretaps. It frustrated me at the timing of his email comments being right before the election. That seemed deliberate and calculated (to me!), as I could not comprehend why the FBI would make a public comment on something that was at that time and open investigation, especially so close to a presidential election when that comment could affect voter opinion.

Transparency
__________________
Yeah, there's no body mutilation in it



Personally, i think we should line Trumps Admin and what was going to be Hilary's Admin up against a wall.. then we should run away really fast and leave them there.

Coz, this all happened on an uninhibited island i forgot to mention, i'd also forget to mention it to Trump and Hilary's dude's.



What is your source that Trump personally is under investigation by the FBI?
Comey confirmed Trump's campaign is being investigated. Given that Trump was the center of his own campaign, he has a stake in this investigation. Should the FBI find evidence of cooperation, they will naturally follow the threads to see if they lead to Trump. And likely someone will talk if there's anything to talk about. Is there a separate investigation specifically targeting Trump at the FBI? I don't know. There should be, though. In the context of this discussion board, I did not say anything inaccurate, nor did I accuse him of being guilty.

This political farce gets loonier every day! After all these Democrats blasting Comey for months and alleging that he caused Hillary the election with several calling for his removal, now when Trump does exactly that they express outrage? As someone noted, “They give hypocrisy a bad name.” Then again, the left has always been noted for hypocrisy such as Hollywood degenerates crying over the plight of the “little guy” while they live like Indian rajahs. As the pre-repentant Ebenezer Scrooge so succinctly put it: “I shall retire to Bedlam.”
I guess your only point here is that all Democrats are hypocrites and always have been...? Sorry if I can't quite take you seriously when you make those broad assertions, especially given the obscene level of hypocrisy surrounding the Trump White House and coming from a disappointing number of Republican politicians who have tied their political careers to the Trump train.

It should be obvious (I would have figured) that someone can be critical of Comey's actions in the past and still be outraged that Trump would fire him so soon after Comey announced the ongoing FBI investigation into Trump's campaign. I fail to see the hypocrisy. You want to say some Democrats did display some level of hypocrisy, then fine. Call them hypocrites. All that is, though, is a deflection. It doesn't change what fundamentally happened, which was an attempt to obstruct justice.

Trump's camp, and mouthpieces, spent all that time trying to make us buy into the ridiculous and absurd reasoning of the firing, only for Trump to undermine all of them by admitting he was thinking of the Russia investigation the whole time and already had his mind made up. That is worthy of being outraged over. It's the timing and the reasons for the firing. I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand, or how anyone can defend it. Or overlook all the praise Trump gave to Comey, only to now say he's no good. Who cares about the Democrats. This has nothing to do with them.



That elusive hide-and-seek cow is at it again
My casual $0.02 regarding Comey stuffs:
He has had a lot of spotlight first leading up to the election publicly commenting on Clinton's email investigation and then publicly contradicting Trump's tweeted claims of Obama's alleged wiretaps. It frustrated me at the timing of his email comments being right before the election. That seemed deliberate and calculated (to me!), as I could not comprehend why the FBI would make a public comment on something that was at that time and open investigation, especially so close to a presidential election when that comment could affect voter opinion.

Transparency

Of?
Does the FBI normally work to affect the election process?



Comey confirmed Trump's campaign is being investigated. Given that Trump was the center of his own campaign, he has a stake in this investigation. Should the FBI find evidence of cooperation, they will naturally follow the threads to see if they lead to Trump. And likely someone will talk if there's anything to talk about. Is there a separate investigation specifically targeting Trump at the FBI? I don't know. There should be, though. In the context of this discussion board, I did not say anything inaccurate, nor did I accuse him of being guilty.

I guess your only point here is that all Democrats are hypocrites and always have been...? Sorry if I can't quite take you seriously when you make those broad assertions, especially given the obscene level of hypocrisy surrounding the Trump White House and coming from a disappointing number of Republican politicians who have tied their political careers to the Trump train.

It should be obvious (I would have figured) that someone can be critical of Comey's actions in the past and still be outraged that Trump would fire him so soon after Comey announced the ongoing FBI investigation into Trump's campaign. I fail to see the hypocrisy. You want to say some Democrats did display some level of hypocrisy, then fine. Call them hypocrites. All that is, though, is a deflection. It doesn't change what fundamentally happened, which was an attempt to obstruct justice.

Trump's camp, and mouthpieces, spent all that time trying to make us buy into the ridiculous and absurd reasoning of the firing, only for Trump to undermine all of them by admitting he was thinking of the Russia investigation the whole time and already had his mind made up. That is worthy of being outraged over. It's the timing and the reasons for the firing. I'm not sure why that is difficult to understand, or how anyone can defend it. Or overlook all the praise Trump gave to Comey, only to now say he's no good. Who cares about the Democrats. This has nothing to do with them.
Hey, Kaplan! You’re a SOB! A swine! A political hack! I question your mother’s ancestry!...Hey, wait a minute! You just got fired by Hillary Clinton? Maybe I was a tad hasty, don’t you know. You can’t be all that bad, after all. Are you free for dinner tomorrow night?

Give me a break! This reminds me of Orwell’s 1984 where Big Brother and the party keeps changing whom the nation is at war with; and when one of the frequent changes occurs, it’s literally done in mid- sentence by one of the party’s propaganda speakers!

From the recent NBC interview with Lester Holt:

Trump: “You know, this Russia thing is a made up story, an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.”

Then he goes on to condemn Russia if they tried to interfere in U.S. elections. Where did I miss that he admitted to having fired Comey over the Russia investigation? He has to get whomever he picks as Comey’s successor through the senate. How is firing Comey going to make whatever Russia related investigations might be ongoing go away?

I’m (and I think a lot of people) fuzzy as to what exactly is the nature of this “scandal”? Putin preferred Trump to Clinton? Well, knock me over with a feather! What is the alleged nature of this “collusion” between Trump or his campaign in this? Someone in Trump’s campaign gave the Russians Podesta’s email address and password? Russian hackers couldn’t have hacked their way in by themselves? And how did this affect the outcome of the race? There’s an old marketing maxim: “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.” Do you think one voter in a thousand could tell you what was in any of Podesta’s hacked emails?



You can't win an argument just by being right!
Is this for real? I dont know what currentcounternews.com is and how credible they are. Trying to take everything with a grain of salt at this point, but if this is legit, fracking why? Are they over populated and this is for a cull?

http://countercurrentnews.com/2017/0...ubs-wolf-pups/



WASHINGTON — President Trump boasted about highly classified intelligence in a meeting with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador last week, providing details that could expose the source of the information and the manner in which it was collected, a current and a former American government official said Monday.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/u...isis.html?_r=0

Jesus. What the heck, was he showing off to his Russian friends? Way to undermine national security and alienate our allies.



In the most predictable sequence imaginable, the White House denied the report...and then Trump confirmed it.

A lot of things about Trump are bad or shocking, but the one that really gets me--and that I'm amazed his supporters are willing to overlook--is his disloyalty to the people who work for him. He throws them under the bus without a moment's hesitation. He routinely contradicts and humiliates them and, with them, all the people who decide to defend him only to see his position change.

Real leadership means taking responsibility and leading a team, not churning through expendable underlings and enablers and discarding them when it's momentarily convenient.



In the most predictable sequence imaginable, the White House denied the report...and then Trump confirmed it.

A lot of things about Trump are bad or shocking, but the one that really gets me--and that I'm amazed his supporters are willing to overlook--is his disloyalty to the people who work for him. He throws them under the bus without a moment's hesitation. He routinely contradicts and humiliates them and, with them, all the people who decide to defend him only to see his position change.

Real leadership means taking responsibility and leading a team, not churning through expendable underlings and enablers and discarding them when it's momentarily convenient.
"President Trump appeared to acknowledge Tuesday that he revealed highly classified information to Russia..." [Emphasis added]

This strikes me as another leftist media organ disguising editorial content as news stories. General McMaster (my “homey”!) has an impeccable reputation for integrity, so much so he was passed over twice for promotion as the brass was piqued at him over his book: Dereliction of Duty In which McMaster recounted lies told by those highly placed in the government under LBJ that led to the debacle of the Vietnam War. McMaster was in the room with the president when these alleged “breeches” of classified information occurred and he denied such occurred.

Secondly, if Trump merely advised the Russians of what had been learned by intelligence sources because he felt it beneficial to the U.S. for the Russians to know, what is wrong about that?

While the U.S. was still neutral in WWII, Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles (obviously acting on orders from FDR through Hull) called in the Russian ambassador to advise him that the U.S. had learned from a highly placed German source that an attack on Russia by Germany was imminent. (I don’t know if Welles told the ambassador how the information was gained.) (On a side note, of course that megalomaniac Stalin ignored the warning as he had countless others—even from his own intelligence sources—because he had stated many times Germany would not attack Russia for some years, if at all; and, of course, Big Brother was never wrong about anything.)

Those striving to bring Trump down might actually have a real story one of these days, rather than just fanning the flames of these imaginary scandals in the absence of facts and proofs.



"President Trump appeared to acknowledge Tuesday that he revealed highly classified information to Russia..." [Emphasis added]
What do you think he's doing here?


Secondly, if Trump merely advised the Russians of what had been learned by intelligence sources because he felt it beneficial to the U.S. for the Russians to know, what is wrong about that?
Gosh, quite a few things, I'd say. But let's say it isn't wrong: why not direct this question to the White House itself? After all, they forcefully denied something that they're now saying isn't wrong. Why deny it, then?



What do you think he's doing here?



Gosh, quite a few things, I'd say. But let's say it isn't wrong: why not direct this question to the White House itself? After all, they forcefully denied something that they're now saying isn't wrong. Why deny it, then?
Just what he said. He shared facts with the Russians (in the hope, as he also said, of persuading the Russians to join with the U.S. in greater anti-terrorism measures to fight ISIS and Al-Qaeda).

Was Roosevelt a communist for trying to help the Soviet Union vis-à-vis Nazi Germany? As Churchill, a lifelong virulent anti-communist, so succinctly put matters after the German invasion of the Soviet Union: "If Hitler invaded Hell, I’d at least put in a favorable mention for the devil in the House of Commons.”



Just what he said. He shared facts with the Russians (in the hope, as he also said, of persuading the Russians to join with the U.S. in greater anti-terrorism measures to fight ISIS and Al-Qaeda).
What I mean is: how do you reconcile this with the insinuation you just made? You emphasized the word "appeared" in that article, implying that he didn't really do it. That tweet seems like a clear admission that he did (since it's a defense, and not a denial).

Was Roosevelt a communist for trying to help the Soviet Union vis-à-vis Nazi Germany.
I daresay there are a few differences between the two, but again, let's assume there was nothing wrong with the action itself (which I find perfectly plausible, by the way): why did the administration deny it?