Lets see if we can keep this thread a little more civil.

I found this interview very interesting.  A lot of soft balls thrown at Trump, he explained his back pedalling on his more extreme issues as a lot of his claims as opening bids for negotiation purposes.  Which .. whatever .. I still think that those are insincere claims he used to get elected.

He does now come across way more presidential then he did prior to the election.  A lot of his noise, yelling, and rhetoric has been scaled back.

Do respect this one though:

Quote

 

Lesley Stahl: Are you gonna take the salary, the president’s salary?

Donald Trump: Well, I’ve never commented on this, but the answer is no. I think I have to by law take $1, so I’ll take $1 a year. But it’s a -- I don’t even know what it is.

Donald Trump: Do you know what the salary is?

Lesley Stahl: $400,000 you’re giving up.

Donald Trump: No, I’m not gonna take the salary. I’m not taking it.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-donald-trump-family-melania-ivanka-lesley-stahl/

Just now, Zontar said:

It's "unusual " when it's part of a directed campaign to either undermine or destroy a political enemy. Not to investigate a crime. There was no crime and they knew it.

This was the legal and intelligence apparatus used for partisan political pur poses not legal ones. It's ugly and more than a little scary.

Ill play along even though you've now been corrected and educated by multiple posters about this.  The counter-intelligence investigation was started after Australia revealed to the US what Papadopulous said, which was Russia was offering dirt to the campaign.  What part of that dont you understand?

If Obama wanted to sink Trump, he'd have publicly revealed all this.  He quietly informed Trump that Russia was trying to infiltrate his campaign.  Doesnt sound like an effort to undermine to me.

3 minutes ago, Zontar said:

It's "unusual " when it's part of a directed campaign to either undermine or destroy a political enemy. Not to investigate a crime. There was no crime and they knew it.

This was the legal and intelligence apparatus used for partisan political pur poses not legal ones. It's ugly and more than a little scary.

SO... how did they know there was no crime unless they investigated it... I don't follow your logic here. Just need a bit of clarification- thanks!

Edited May 3, 20196 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

1 minute ago, Wideleft said:

What exactly is Sarah Huckabee Sanders doing on this board and how did she even find out about it?  

Yup and this is what needs to be weeded out.  Posting false facts, knowingly and repeatedly.  Its absurd.  

10 minutes ago, Zontar said:

Lots of people in the party, and media are terrified in being revealed as go betweens with crooks in FBI and DOJ to leak fake "bombshell" and "walls are closing in" stories to create Trump collusion illusion. 

Interesting take on things- do you have any links, if so, could you please share them- I am curious as to why the MSM didn't pick up on this.

cool thread on gerrymandering in Ohio:

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

If Obama wanted to sink Trump, he'd have publicly revealed all this.  

It was, like other "bombshell" stories derived from illegal leaks, slowly but consistently for over two years to create the impression Trump was a dead man walking. Which is why Truthers were so crushed the Mueller report rolled snake eyes. You thought you had it in the bag.

This what Barr will investigate and why people are scared.

3 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

Interesting take on things- do you have any links, if so, could you please share them- I am curious as to why the MSM didn't pick up on this.

Yeah, it's as if MSM has vested interests in ignoring stories or something.

5 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Ill play along even though you've now been corrected and educated by multiple posters about this.  The counter-intelligence investigation was started after Australia revealed to the US what Papadopulous said, which was Russia was offering dirt to the campaign.  What part of that dont you understand?

If Obama wanted to sink Trump, he'd have publicly revealed all this.  He quietly informed Trump that Russia was trying to infiltrate his campaign.  Doesnt sound like an effort to undermine to me.

And don't forget that Obama wanted his government to advise the American people of Russian influence in a joint statement from all branches of government as impartially as he could, but Mitch McConnell would not agree to it.  Trump is dangerous in his incompetence and ignorance whereas McConnell is absolutely shameless and cynical about the functions of government.

Biden: McConnell Refused To Sign Bipartisan Statement On Russian Interference

In the meeting, the Post reports:

"The Dems were, 'Hey, we have to tell the public,' " recalled one participant. But Republicans resisted, arguing that to warn the public that the election was under attack would further Russia's aim of sapping confidence in the system.

... McConnell (R-Ky.) went further, officials said, voicing skepticism that the underlying intelligence truly supported the White House's claims. Through a spokeswoman, McConnell declined to comment, citing the secrecy of that meeting.

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/24/580171396/biden-mcconnell-refused-to-sign-bipartisan-statement-on-russian-interference

3 minutes ago, Zontar said:

It was, like other "bombshell" stories derived from illegal leaks, slowly but consistently for over two years to create the impression Trump was a dead man walking. Which is why Truthers were so crushed the Mueller report rolled snake eyes. You thought you had it in the bag.

This what Barr will investigate and why people are scared.

Not before the election.  

What do you mean I thought I had it in the bag?  Do you think Im Hilary?

You ignored the rest of my post because you cant answer honestly.

Serious question: are you a child (would be good to know so we treat you appropriately as your level of understanding seems very juvenile and Im saying that seriously).

And by snake eyes, do you mean the report that detailed a whole bunch of collusion and even more obstruction or some imaginary report only you saw?

Edited May 3, 20196 yr by The Unknown Poster

21 minutes ago, Zontar said:

Yeah, it's as if MSM has vested interests in ignoring stories or something.

So... no links or evidence or anything to support what you are putting out there... ?

 

I apologise, but I need more than your single post to go on. I need something to support your view to take it into consideration.

23 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

And don't forget that Obama wanted his government to advise the American people of Russian influence in a joint statement from all branches of government as impartially as he could, but Mitch McConnell would not agree to it.  Trump is dangerous in his incompetence and ignorance whereas McConnell is absolutely shameless and cynical about the functions of government.

Biden: McConnell Refused To Sign Bipartisan Statement On Russian Interference

In the meeting, the Post reports:

"The Dems were, 'Hey, we have to tell the public,' " recalled one participant. But Republicans resisted, arguing that to warn the public that the election was under attack would further Russia's aim of sapping confidence in the system.

... McConnell (R-Ky.) went further, officials said, voicing skepticism that the underlying intelligence truly supported the White House's claims. Through a spokeswoman, McConnell declined to comment, citing the secrecy of that meeting.

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/01/24/580171396/biden-mcconnell-refused-to-sign-bipartisan-statement-on-russian-interference

Good Lord, I loath cocaine mitch. 

He has done more damage to the democracy of the USA than trump has. 

He is vile.

According to Zontar herself, Trump and Putin discussed whether or not Don McGahn would be allowed to testify before Congress.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-putin-discussed-mueller-report-agreed-no-collusion-white-house-n1001706

 

Just now, Wideleft said:

According to Zontar herself, Trump and Putin discussed whether or not Don McGahn would be allowed to testify before Congress.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-putin-discussed-mueller-report-agreed-no-collusion-white-house-n1001706

 

Chain of command. 

2 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

According to Zontar herself, Trump and Putin discussed whether or not Don McGahn would be allowed to testify before Congress.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-putin-discussed-mueller-report-agreed-no-collusion-white-house-n1001706

 

Wow!

6 minutes ago, Wideleft said:

According to Zontar herself, Trump and Putin discussed whether or not Don McGahn would be allowed to testify before Congress.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-putin-discussed-mueller-report-agreed-no-collusion-white-house-n1001706

 

Holy shitballs!

I saw that headline on CNN and gave the article a cursory glance and dismissed it as CNN being sentionalistic... being that sure of course if Putin and his lackey were on the phone, that the Mueller report would come up and such- makes sense and sure it's probably not as innocent as huckasands makes it out to be, but nothing crazy alarming... 

Totally missed the part where the POTUS, was asking the leader of a hostile foreign  power to weigh in on his criminality and whether or not to let his POTUS lawyer  testify.... WTF?

I would like to hear Sanders response or read a direct quote. I can't believe that she would say this. I can believe it happened but can't believe someone who lies for a living would make this kind of blunder. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

 

 

 

Well, that was very responsible of the FAKE NEWS media. 

Now let's see if trump can issue a correction for his factually incorrect statements since he took office- all 10,000+ of them.

Best part is, it was wholly believable.  

19 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Best part is, it was wholly believable.  

I'll reserve judgement until I see the huck-a-sands exchange.

Call me cynical, but I still think that is excatly what she said- that trump consulted Putin about Mcgahn. 

 

Edited May 3, 20196 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

1 hour ago, Zontar said:

It's "unusual " when it's part of a directed campaign to either undermine or destroy a political enemy. Not to investigate a crime. There was no crime and they knew it.

This was the legal and intelligence apparatus used for partisan political pur poses not legal ones. It's ugly and more than a little scary.

Except that people from Trumps campaign team are in jail, so perhaps they were well within their rights and in fact simply doing their duty to investigate them. 

It's like a mobster complaining that it's unfair that the cops are spying on them. 

Don't want to be investigated? STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASSHOLES!

As a matter of fact, they didn't know it, so they investigated it. And, as a matter of fact, there was crime and many, many people have been indicted and/or plead guilty to those crimes. 

And, the Mueller report backs everything up.

The President would be under indictment now if he were not the President.

4 hours ago, Wideleft said:

And don't forget that Obama wanted his government to advise the American people of Russian influence in a joint statement from all branches of government as impartially as he could, but Mitch McConnell would not agree to it. 

This is a great example of the Democrats being weak, timid, afraid of the big bad Republicans, and not doing their job.

After everything he dealt with with MConnell, preventing him from appointing judges and so on, did Obama actually expect something different on this?

If yes, then he's really stupid. And we know, he's not stupid.

And where does it say he needed approval from anyone about this? Does anyone think Mc Connell would have asked permission from anyone to release this informaiton?

fat chance. 

Pitiful and spineless on Obama/Democrats part. Russian interference with the election of the President, and he is more worried about "bipartisanship"

They really have not been up to the task of dealing with these fascists. Pelosi still waffling and "waiting to see"

While their country is spit on and stomped into the ground by thugs.

They definitely bear some responsiblity in this horrendous situation.

/rant over.

Edited May 3, 20196 yr by Mark F

Democrats don't show up to vote if they are unhappy with the party, they have to cater to them, unlike Republicans who have guaranteed support no matter what kind of **** they do.

6 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Democrats don't show up to vote if they are unhappy with the party, they have to cater to them, unlike Republicans who have guaranteed support no matter what kind of **** they do.

 

FFS