You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:So Comey did tell Trump he wasn't personally under investigation 3 times in his prepared testimony before Congress. At what point will this nonsense end? Trump is the President.
Will James Brown and Schiff apologize? Will our board members who called for impeachment admit they were wrong? In short, TRUMP WAS NEVER UNDER INVESTIGATION. Though I'm sure the goal post will be moved again and I'll be called a bunch of names. I believe the great poet W. Axl Rose once said "It's harder to live with the truths about you than to live with the lies about me"
Wow, you're a genius. Trump's administration is under investigation. As we've been saying for months now.
When arguing against a strawman, I guess it's no surprise you continue to do so as this thing unfolds.
What it did show, was that one more than one occasion, Trump used his position to try and influence the head of the FBI to drop the investigation. Comey wasn't the only one he asked. That's why Trump's intel chiefs were refusing to answer questions today on the hill. If the answer was "no" they would have said so.
Furthermore, as with all criminal investigations, they lower down the food chain and work their way up. Just as they are doing here. They don't start with the top guy.
Trump obstructed justice, and no amount of spin/lying from you traitors is going to change that.
Quit lying. Who the fuck is "we"? You're not the sole member of the board. I know you think 9/11 was an inside job, but the adults are talking. You can go play make believe and call me names on your own board.
That's nowhere near the same. You had a background check, not investigated for colluding with an enemy nation.
They've been investigating since July. How long from when Comey dropped his bullshit letter on Hillary and admitted there was nothing to it? All roads from Trump lead to Moscow. That's a bit more than coincidental. Russia won. Completely outsmarted us and kicked our ass.
Comey literally said he can't say what they found because it's classified, so if you u want to take that as exoneration, okay. But repubs heads were exploding in trying to cover Trump's ass by undermining evidence, such as news reports, which they gleefully use themselves.
Today was not a good day for Trump. It's an investigation that's still going on. That Trump is in fact a liar. That Russians also hacked the RNC but never released their info...
Republicans are making a point to Comey not to leave a black cloud hanging over the Trump whitehouse with a vague assertion of an investigation, because it's not fair for Trump, Tillerson and Conway... You know, like he did to Hillary.
Gowdy wasted millions of dollars investigating Hillary and finding nothing. Now he doesn't want any investigation. And to prosecute reporters for reporting leaks, when they gleefully accepted anything against Hillary.
Note: Trump is a liar.
My opinion is based on what I've read. There seems to be smoke. We will see where it goes. The point is your reactions, your inability to not result to childishness. I can totally respect anyone having a differing view, because there is no smoking gun, but something stinks, and unless there's a big Russia coincidence revolving around Trump and it's all just a big tsunami of coincidences that just look bad and aren't nefarious, I'm inclined to believe something is very wrong here and it relates to corruption. Maybe they can prove otherwise.... But the burdon of proof isn't on me. We didn't make these issues up. These reports happened because of Trump's behavior. His decisions, he owns it.
And don't lose credibility evoking buzz...
We need to establish no evidence and refusing to consider ANY evidence. There's plenty of evidence. It's kind of fitting that a right wing parrot keeps repeating the same thing over and over...
The outrage isn't from his firing but the timing. He wasn't fired after the election shenanigans but only when it's clear there's an investigation on Trump's ties to Russia. I won't be stunned if the leaks really start coming now.
I'll say it again. You're a partisan clown. ID spent weeks claiming Trump colluded with Russia. There's the posts. Take your head out of your ass and realize you're a truther who will believe anything, including piss tapes, if it makes a Republican look bad. You're a joke.
The first time any of you said "well, maybe not Trump, but SOMEONE DID" was 3 weeks ago
http://www.gnrevolution.com/viewtopic.p … 97#p302297
I find it very possible Trump didn't personally collude with Russia, but his campaign did in some capacity. Right now he's making moves that could easily fall into a cover up. Hillary had a horrible habit of making really little problems into really big issues. This reminds me of that.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
All that work and not one post where I said he colluded with Russia. Matter of FACT, I said there was no smoking gun. That's hilarious. Again, you're the partisan and the one calling names...
You want me to quote Trump after he stepped in shit? He actually refused to answer any questions about his claims. I think he's in the tank with Russia. You want physical evidence produced on your doorstep for anything you don't like. No one has an obligation to you, RF. If you disagree, disagree, don't be a child about it. I have no evidence Rudy collaborated with the FBI to leak Hillary info when he bragged before hand something big was about to drop... I just know he did.
If you really believe that, that there aren't posts after posts of you saying Trump worked with Russia, then how the fuck do you think anyone is going to take "I Hope you find a way to let this go" as Obstruction of Justice. Just be honest. You personally railed for weeks about Trump colluding with Russia. It's all right there, among many others. No one besides you and the truther are buying it. You made a fool out of yourself claiming there was an investigation into Trump, and fucking Comey confirmed today there never was. Get over yourself. You were wrong.
You've spent months pining that there was going to be a big pay off. It's not going to happen. Have some fucking integrity and admit you were wrong. Do you really want to be the only one aligned with the guy who was Alex Jones' biggest fan until Barry was elected?
You said the burden of proof was never on you. Well here it is, Trump was never under investigation. You and the retards in your party (including the asshole who drafted impeachment articles before Comey has even testified) are an embarrassment to the intellectual honesty of this country. If you can read those quotes and come away that you didn't have a hard on for Trump, you're a special kind of person.
Seriously. I want anyone who isn't SLC or ID to look at those quotes, knowing full well the discussions we've had here for months, and say that ID wasn't arguing Trump was guilty of colluding with Russia. Will anyone defend ID?
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
Seriously, this is how disingenuous you guys are. SLC posts "That's why Trump's intel chiefs were refusing to answer questions today on the hill. If the answer was "no" they would have said so."
Here is the exact quote from the panel today "In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything that I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate. And to the best of my collection … I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so”
“Did the president … ask you in any way, shape or form to back off or downplay the Russia investigation?”
“I stand by the comment I just made, sir.”
But our resident Truther comes here and says that this answer is somehow a non-answer and is evidence of Trump asking them to drop the investigation. It's absolutely nuts and shows that no amount of evidence or testimony is going to sway your opinion.
Somehow "In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything that I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate. And to the best of my collection … I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so" is code for "Trump asked me to back off the Russia investigation"
And best yet "Furthermore, as with all criminal investigations, they lower down the food chain and work their way up. Just as they are doing here. They don't start with the top guy." as if SLC has any fucking clue how a criminal investigation by the FBI is conducted. When did he become an FBI agent. When did he gain years of experience in investigations? In what world does he have any credibility or background in government investigations to make this kind of claim. And the true irony, and I truly believe he is too blind to see it, is he's still saying Trump colluded, they just haven't got to him yet.
Fuck James Comey, the director of the FBI. His comments that Trump was never under investigation is apparently meaningless. We have SLC, a real world Monk and Columbo here to offer advice and expert opinions on FBI investigations.
You were duped. Now you look like idiots. Time to move on.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-indepe … 1496878266
The Senate Intelligence Committee released James Comey’s prepared testimony a day early on Wednesday, and it looks like a test of whether Washington can apprehend reality except as another Watergate. Perhaps the defrocked FBI director has a bombshell still to drop. But far from documenting an abuse of power by President Trump, his prepared statement reveals Mr. Comey’s misunderstanding of law enforcement in a democracy.
Mr. Comey’s seven-page narrative recounts his nine encounters with the President-elect and then President, including an appearance at Trump Tower, a one-on-one White House dinner and phone calls. He describes how he briefed Mr. Trump on the Russia counterintelligence investigation and what he calls multiple attempts to “create some sort of patronage relationship.”
But at worst Mr. Comey’s account of Mr. Trump reveals a willful and naive narcissist who believes he can charm or subtly intimidate the FBI director but has no idea how Washington works. This is not new information.
When you’re dining alone in the Green Room with an operator like Mr. Comey—calculating, self-protective, one of the more skilled political knife-fighters of modern times—there are better approaches than asserting “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” Of course the righteous director was going to “memorialize” (his word) these conversations as political insurance.
Mr. Trump’s ham-handed demand for loyalty doesn’t seem to extend beyond the events of 2016, however. In Mr. Comey’s telling, the President is preoccupied with getting credit for the election results and resentful that the political class is delegitimizing his victory with “the cloud” of Russian interference when he believes he did nothing wrong.
Mr. Comey also confirms that on at least three occasions he told Mr. Trump that he was not a personal target of the Russia probe. But Mr. Comey wouldn’t make a public statement to the same effect, “most importantly because it would create a duty to correct” if Mr. Trump were implicated. This is odd because the real obligation is to keep quiet until an investigation is complete.
More interesting is that Mr. Trump’s frustration at Mr. Comey’s refusal raises the possibility that the source of Mr. Trump’s self-destructive behavior isn’t a coverup or a bid to obstruct the investigation. The source could simply be Mr. Trump’s wounded pride.
The most troubling part of Mr. Comey’s statement is his belief in what he calls “the FBI’s traditionally independent status in the executive branch,” which he invokes more than once. Independent? This is a false and dangerous view of law enforcement in the American system.
Mr. Comey is describing an FBI director who essentially answers to no one. But the police powers of the government are awesome and often abused, and the only way to prevent or correct abuses is to report to elected officials who are accountable to voters. A director must resist intervention to obstruct an investigation, but he and the agency must be politically accountable or risk becoming the FBI of J. Edgar Hoover.
Mr. Comey says Mr. Trump strongly suggested in February that he close the Michael Flynn file, but after conferring with his “FBI senior leadership” he decided not to relay the conversation to Attorney General Jeff Sessions or any other Justice Department superior. If he thought he was being unduly pressured he had a legal obligation to report, and in our view to resign, but he says he didn’t because “we expected” that Mr. Sessions would recuse himself from Russia involvement.
Well, how did he know? Mr. Sessions didn’t recuse himself until two weeks later. Mr. Comey also didn’t tell the acting Deputy AG, who at the time was a U.S. attorney whom Mr. Comey dismisses as someone “who would also not be long in the role.”
This remarkable presumptuousness is the Comey mindset that was on display last year. He broke Justice Department protocol to absolve Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified material, without the involvement of Justice prosecutors or even telling then Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Mr. Comey’s disregard for the chain of legal command is why Mr. Trump was right to fire him, whatever his reasons.
Also on Wednesday two leaders of the intelligence community told the Senate Wednesday that they had not been pressured to cover up anything. “I have never been pressured—I have never felt pressured—to intervene or interfere in any way with shaping intelligence in a political way or in relation to an ongoing investigation,” said Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats. National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers added that he never been asked “to do anything I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate.”
Meanwhile, Mr. Trump announced that he is nominating respected Justice Department veteran Christopher Wray as the next FBI director. Let’s hope Mr. Wray has a better understanding of the FBI’s role under the Constitution than Mr. Comey does.
Re: US Politics Thread
misterID wrote:All that work and not one post where I said he colluded with Russia. Matter of FACT, I said there was no smoking gun. That's hilarious. Again, you're the partisan and the one calling names...
misterID wrote:You want me to quote Trump after he stepped in shit? He actually refused to answer any questions about his claims. I think he's in the tank with Russia. You want physical evidence produced on your doorstep for anything you don't like. No one has an obligation to you, RF. If you disagree, disagree, don't be a child about it. I have no evidence Rudy collaborated with the FBI to leak Hillary info when he bragged before hand something big was about to drop... I just know he did.
If you really believe that, that there aren't posts after posts of you saying Trump worked with Russia, then how the fuck do you think anyone is going to take "I Hope you find a way to let this go" as Obstruction of Justice. Just be honest. You personally railed for weeks about Trump colluding with Russia. It's all right there, among many others. No one besides you and the truther are buying it. You made a fool out of yourself claiming there was an investigation into Trump, and fucking Comey confirmed today there never was. Get over yourself. You were wrong.
You've spent months pining that there was going to be a big pay off. It's not going to happen. Have some fucking integrity and admit you were wrong. Do you really want to be the only one aligned with the guy who was Alex Jones' biggest fan until Barry was elected?
You said the burden of proof was never on you. Well here it is, Trump was never under investigation. You and the retards in your party (including the asshole who drafted impeachment articles before Comey has even testified) are an embarrassment to the intellectual honesty of this country. If you can read those quotes and come away that you didn't have a hard on for Trump, you're a special kind of person.
Seriously. I want anyone who isn't SLC or ID to look at those quotes, knowing full well the discussions we've had here for months, and say that ID wasn't arguing Trump was guilty of colluding with Russia. Will anyone defend ID?
Again, name calling. Yes, I definitely think he's in the tank for Russia. Absolutely. Do I think he personally colluded? No, probably not. I think his campaign did and probably talked up how awesome Russia was and the dumb ass bought into it.
You have been the one crying and whining and throwing hissy fits that he didn't do anything and even more disingenuously, tried to play the investigations off as having not found anything and falsely claiming he was cleared, when the investigations are ongoing and have not revealed any findings. That is a lie. That was literally what the majority of posts you quoted were from, your denial of reality.
Re: US Politics Thread
WSJ 
What Randall didn't tell you about the hearing today:
McCabe didn’t offer a direct answer, at which point the senator (King) then turned to Coats and Rogers.
“Is there an invocation by the president of the United States of executive privilege? Is there or not?” King asked Rogers.
“Not that I’m aware of,” Rogers replied.
“Then why are you not answering the questions?” King asked.
“Because I feel it is inappropriate, senator,” Rogers said.
“What you feel isn’t relevant, admiral,” King shot back.
Rogers later said he wasn’t trying to speak “in a contentious way,” to which King replied, “Well, I do mean it in a contentious way.”
Later, Rogers said the conversations referenced were classified, prompting another challenge from King.
Advertisement
“What is classified about a conversation involving whether or not you should intervene in the FBI investigation?” he asked.
“Sir, I stand by my previous comments,” Rogers said.
King then turned to Coats and asked him why he was refusing to answer questions, to which Coats said he didn’t think it was “appropriate.”
“I’m not satisfied with ‘I do not believe it’s appropriate,’ or ‘I do not feel I should answer.’ I want to understand a legal basis,” King said.
Coats then answered, “I’m not sure I have a legal basis,” but said he would answer questions in a closed session.
When King pressed him on getting answers in a closed session, Coats cautioned that he still needed to determine whether the White House would invoke executive privilege.
King, in a brief interview after Wednesday’s hearing, acknowledged that he was frustrated.
“I was frustrated by the fact that these two witnesses, and to a lesser extent Mr. McCabe, were refusing to answer questions without providing any basis for their refusal,” he said. “You can’t just say, ‘This is something I don’t feel like answering.’ ”
The lead Republican even criticized them for not answering questions and not being forthcoming. Being directed is different than being asked.
Disingenuous.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:misterID wrote:All that work and not one post where I said he colluded with Russia. Matter of FACT, I said there was no smoking gun. That's hilarious. Again, you're the partisan and the one calling names...
misterID wrote:You want me to quote Trump after he stepped in shit? He actually refused to answer any questions about his claims. I think he's in the tank with Russia. You want physical evidence produced on your doorstep for anything you don't like. No one has an obligation to you, RF. If you disagree, disagree, don't be a child about it. I have no evidence Rudy collaborated with the FBI to leak Hillary info when he bragged before hand something big was about to drop... I just know he did.
If you really believe that, that there aren't posts after posts of you saying Trump worked with Russia, then how the fuck do you think anyone is going to take "I Hope you find a way to let this go" as Obstruction of Justice. Just be honest. You personally railed for weeks about Trump colluding with Russia. It's all right there, among many others. No one besides you and the truther are buying it. You made a fool out of yourself claiming there was an investigation into Trump, and fucking Comey confirmed today there never was. Get over yourself. You were wrong.
You've spent months pining that there was going to be a big pay off. It's not going to happen. Have some fucking integrity and admit you were wrong. Do you really want to be the only one aligned with the guy who was Alex Jones' biggest fan until Barry was elected?
You said the burden of proof was never on you. Well here it is, Trump was never under investigation. You and the retards in your party (including the asshole who drafted impeachment articles before Comey has even testified) are an embarrassment to the intellectual honesty of this country. If you can read those quotes and come away that you didn't have a hard on for Trump, you're a special kind of person.
Seriously. I want anyone who isn't SLC or ID to look at those quotes, knowing full well the discussions we've had here for months, and say that ID wasn't arguing Trump was guilty of colluding with Russia. Will anyone defend ID?
Again, name calling. Yes, I definitely think he's in the tank for Russia. Absolutely. Do I think he personally colluded? No, probably not. I think his campaign did and probably talked up how awesome Russia was and the dumb ass bought into it.
You have been the one crying and whining and throwing hissy fits that he didn't do anything and even more disingenuously, tried to play the investigations off as having not found anything and falsely claiming he was cleared, when the investigations are ongoing and have not revealed any findings. That is a lie. That was literally what the majority of posts you quoted were from, your denial of reality.
He was never under investigation. At least not at anytime as of January 2017, well before you started yelling about conspiracies.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
WSJ
What Randall didn't tell you about the hearing today:
McCabe didn’t offer a direct answer, at which point the senator (King) then turned to Coats and Rogers.
“Is there an invocation by the president of the United States of executive privilege? Is there or not?” King asked Rogers.
“Not that I’m aware of,” Rogers replied.
“Then why are you not answering the questions?” King asked.
“Because I feel it is inappropriate, senator,” Rogers said.
“What you feel isn’t relevant, admiral,” King shot back.
Rogers later said he wasn’t trying to speak “in a contentious way,” to which King replied, “Well, I do mean it in a contentious way.”
Later, Rogers said the conversations referenced were classified, prompting another challenge from King.
Advertisement
“What is classified about a conversation involving whether or not you should intervene in the FBI investigation?” he asked.
“Sir, I stand by my previous comments,” Rogers said.
King then turned to Coats and asked him why he was refusing to answer questions, to which Coats said he didn’t think it was “appropriate.”
“I’m not satisfied with ‘I do not believe it’s appropriate,’ or ‘I do not feel I should answer.’ I want to understand a legal basis,” King said.
Coats then answered, “I’m not sure I have a legal basis,” but said he would answer questions in a closed session.
When King pressed him on getting answers in a closed session, Coats cautioned that he still needed to determine whether the White House would invoke executive privilege.
King, in a brief interview after Wednesday’s hearing, acknowledged that he was frustrated.
“I was frustrated by the fact that these two witnesses, and to a lesser extent Mr. McCabe, were refusing to answer questions without providing any basis for their refusal,” he said. “You can’t just say, ‘This is something I don’t feel like answering.’ ”
The lead Republican even criticized them for not answering questions and not being forthcoming. Being directed is different than being asked.
Disingenuous.
"In the three-plus years that I have been the director of the National Security Agency, to the best of my recollection, I have never been directed to do anything that I believe to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate. And to the best of my collection … I do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so”
