America under President Trump

[Omni]

6 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Good grief!  Yes, he said that, however - and I'll slow it down a bit for you, the threat of tapes makes Comey more honest in his testimony - just in case.  IOW, he has to say things that he may not otherwise say - get it?

Apparently you don't get it. He says what he says not caring whether there are tapes or not. That points to the credibility of what he says. Trump on the other hand..... Hope that wasn't too fast for you. I could slow it down if you need time.

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

No....however....

She wanted referred to as a 'matter'...her words.

Not an investigation.

He wasn't supposed to be talking to anyone about it in the first place. His opening his mouth is why he was and remains under investigation by the Justice Department Inspector General.

Edited June 10, 2017 by Argus

[Hal 9000]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

Really? Because according to Trump he lied repeatedly - except for the parts Trump liked.

That's exactly why.  I don't think Comey lied about incidents so much as I think he exaggerated his feelings and reasons for his actions.

[Hal 9000]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

Apparently you don't get it. He says what he says not caring whether there are tapes or not. That points to the credibility of what he says. Trump on the other hand..... Hope that wasn't too fast for you. I could slow it down if you need time.

Obviously the possibility of tapes weighs heavily on him, he said as much in the testimony.

[Omni]

3 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Obviously the possibility of tapes weighs heavily on him, he said as much in the testimony.

What he said was he would be happy to have the tapes made public, if they exist. You notice how Trump avoided the question as per usual.

[Hal 9000]

5 minutes ago, Omni said:

What he said was he would be happy to have the tapes made public, if they exist. You notice how Trump avoided the question as per usual.

UGGG! You are so dumb interesting.

Edited June 10, 2017 by Hal 9000
Shouldn't have called member Omni "dumb". No matter what I find to be obvious - I apologize for calling him dumb

[Omni]

1 minute ago, Hal 9000 said:

UGGG! You are so dumb.

Well then give us the benefit of your "knowledge" then, please.

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

Nope. I think Trump was delighted with the guy who helped make him president.

A lot of people helped, including Donna Brazile.

[Hal 9000]

13 minutes ago, Omni said:

Well then give us the benefit of your "knowledge" then, please.

I just don't think you understand the nuances of "the game" that's being played here.  I think you believe that one side wear black hats and are wrong  and corrupt and the other side all wear white hats and are true and noble.  I don't think you really understand even who the players are.

Edited June 10, 2017 by Hal 9000

[OftenWrong]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

Doesn't seem clear to me. Seems odd to me that everyone around Trump has been in contact with the Russians, even his lawyer.

From Comey's testimony on Thursday-

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, sought further clarification by pointedly asking about a much-discussed New York Times' story from February titled "Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence." Comey did not mince words by responding that the Times' story "was not true" and saying yes when Cotton asked if the article was "almost entirely wrong."

This story is over. Yet Liberal mouths continue yapping and insisting that we wait a little longer to see what happens next. "Just give it another two weeks."
We are being duped.

[Omni]

2 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I just don't think you understand the nuances of "the game" that's being played here.  I think you believe that one side wear black hats and are wrong  and corrupt and the other side all wear white hats and are true and noble.  I don't think you really understand even who the players are.

Well let's see: you have the POTUS, you know what that stands for right? and you have the ex FBI chief whom the former fired for reasons which may be criminal. or at least impeachable. I'll leave it at that for now until you catch up.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, OftenWrong said:

From Comey's testimony on Thursday-

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, sought further clarification by pointedly asking about a much-discussed New York Times' story from February titled "Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence." Comey did not mince words by responding that the Times' story "was not true" and saying yes when Cotton asked if the article was "almost entirely wrong."

This story is over. Yet Liberal mouths continue yapping and insisting that we wait a little longer to see what happens next. "Just give it another two weeks."
We are being duped.

You just want to walk away huh? Well put your fingers in your ears and sing lalalalala, if and when the tapes are turned over.

[OftenWrong]

Just now, Omni said:

You just want to walk away huh? Well put your fingers in your ears and sing lalalalala, if and when the tapes are turned over.

You're free to ignore reality.

[Hal 9000]

2 minutes ago, Omni said:

Well let's see: you have the POTUS, you know what that stands for right? and you have the ex FBI chief whom the former fired for reasons which may be criminal. or at least impeachable. I'll leave it at that for now until you catch up.

No, there is no criminality in firing Comey - that's impossible.  All there is, is media and Dems trying to connect dots and point to Trump firing Comey over some Russian conspiracy, that again has not a shred of evidence.  An investigation that by all accounts, Trump approves of.  

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

No, there is no criminality in firing Comey - that's impossible.  All there is, is media and Dems trying to connect dots and point to Trump firing Comey over some Russian conspiracy, that again has not a shred of evidence.  An investigation that by all accounts, Trump approves of.  

The criminality is referred to as Obstruction of justice. Of course as always, these things have to be proven in court, and that takes time. and you can't indict a siting POTUS. But he can be impeached without courts. That's what has Trump looking over his shoulder.

[Omni]

12 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

You're free to ignore reality.

ditto

[blackbird]

On 2017-06-09 at 2:04 PM, dialamah said:

Foreign-Born Terrorist Country of Origin, 1975 - 2015

Saudi Arabia ... 19 Terrorists, 2369 deaths

 

United Arab Emirates, 2 terrorists, 314 deaths

 

Egypt, 11 terrorists, 162 deaths

 

Lebanon, 4 terrorists, 159 deaths

 

Kuwait, 2 terrorists, 6 deaths

 

Cuba, 11 terrorists, 3 deaths

 

Etc.  

 

Almost no terrorists have come from banned countries; almost all terrorists have come from countries not on the banned list.

 

The ban list is just a sop to Trump supporters and does nothing to make America safer.  

 

Which countries are on the ban list today?   Some not on the ban list like SA have governments that agree to support the war against ISIS and terrorism. The U.S. chooses it's allies based on what they believe is in their best interest, not what some lefty thinks would make an appearance of the best social justice.

[OftenWrong]

Just now, Omni said:

ditto

Don't be sad that I just crushed all your hopes and dreams. Life will go on. But this party's over old boy.

[Omni]

Just now, OftenWrong said:

Don't be sad that I just crushed all your hopes and dreams. Life will go on. But this party's over old boy.

No I think you meant to say HIS party's over, old boy.

[Omni]

I see just now the likes of faux news and breitbart are trying flog the notion that this is all Comey's fault because he didn't advise Trump, that the meeting Trump called him to was inappropriate. That stoops the the IQ level of "the dog ate my homework"  

[OftenWrong]

On 2017-06-09 at 7:02 PM, Hal 9000 said:

Now I'm crossed, should I believe Alan Dershowitz or Omni and Wilbur?  

Thanks to Comey you can relax, and believe Dershowitz-

In his testimony former FBI director James Comey echoed a view that I alone have been expressing for several weeks, and that has been attacked by nearly every Democratic pundit. Comey confirmed that under our Constitution, the president has the authority to direct the FBI to stop investigating any individual. I paraphrase, because the transcript is not yet available:  the president can, in theory, decide who to investigate, who to stop investigating, who to prosecute and who not to prosecute.  The president is the head of the unified executive branch of government, and the Justice Department and the FBI work under him and he may order them to do what he wishes.

Just as the president would have had the constitutional power to pardon Flynn and thus end the criminal investigation of him, he certainly had the authority to request the director of the FBI to end his investigation of Flynn.

Any "hope" on the part of misguided liberals that there is a chance for an obstruction charge is now also over.

[bush_cheney2004]

5 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Thanks to Comey you can relax, and believe Dershowitz-

...Any "hope" on the part of misguided liberals that there is a chance for an obstruction charge is now also over.

 

Agreed...even MSNBC's legal experts have been trying to point out this reality....an obstruction charge cannot be legally sustained based on what we know.

All those who are still butt-hurt (American or Canadian) over the Trump election victory will have to hope for some other way to get him.

[Wilber]

1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

Thanks to Comey you can relax, and believe Dershowitz-

In his testimony former FBI director James Comey echoed a view that I alone have been expressing for several weeks, and that has been attacked by nearly every Democratic pundit. Comey confirmed that under our Constitution, the president has the authority to direct the FBI to stop investigating any individual. I paraphrase, because the transcript is not yet available:  the president can, in theory, decide who to investigate, who to stop investigating, who to prosecute and who not to prosecute.  The president is the head of the unified executive branch of government, and the Justice Department and the FBI work under him and he may order them to do what he wishes.

Just as the president would have had the constitutional power to pardon Flynn and thus end the criminal investigation of him, he certainly had the authority to request the director of the FBI to end his investigation of Flynn.

Any "hope" on the part of misguided liberals that there is a chance for an obstruction charge is now also over.

Wow, that sounds more like the powers of a 17th century monarch than the elected leader of a modern democratic state. So relax.

[Omni]

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Agreed...even MSNBC's legal experts have been trying to point out this reality....an obstruction charge cannot be legally sustained based on what we know.

All those who are still butt-hurt (American or Canadian) over the Trump election victory will have to hope for some other way to get him.

And I'm betting he will be only too able to provide.He's been in how long so far and already impeachment discussions happening.

[bush_cheney2004]

There were also discussions about the impeachment of President Obama for extrajudicial killings of Americans and assassinations of terrorist leaders with drone strikes.    Never happened......