http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39167110



Mr Trump's tweets followed allegations made by conservative radio host Mark Levin, which were later picked up by Breitbart News, who got it from

former Heat Street editor Louise Mensch reported “sources with links to the counter-intelligence community”

Below is a Quote from Donald Trump about the media shocking

“I’m against the people that make up stories and make up sources. They shouldn’t be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody’s name. Let their name be put out there. Let their name be put out.”

but has no issues accusing Obama over twitter :tm:

Thin skinned, shoot first ask questions later mentality, the ruckus in the oval office they taped from a distance; was probably someone asking him to give up his phone and stop tweeting like a damn 13 year old.

It's painfully obvious that these stupid actions are used to distract us from the dismantling of federal agencies. The media eats it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's painfully obvious that these stupid actions are used to distract us from the dismantling of federal agencies. The media eats it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's starting to feel like collusion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Given the amount of contact with the Russians by Trump's associates I could see it happening. Maybe the FBI heard Flynn and the Ambassador saying that after the Russians hack and release the DNC emails and if Trump gets elected president Trump eould start speaking highly of the Russians and will remove the sanctions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Given the amount of contact with the Russians by Trump's associates I could see it happening. Maybe the FBI heard Flynn and the Ambassador saying that after the Russians hack and release the DNC emails and if Trump gets elected president Trump eould start speaking highly of the Russians and will remove the sanctions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, when is the FBI going to tell us that it heard what you said maybe they heard? Maybe they're afraid of Trump. Maybe Trump asked the Russians to hack the FBI, and he's got info that the FBI I colluding with the Dems. Gosh--the number of maybe's is hyuge. Make a good movie.

It's painfully obvious that these stupid actions are used to distract us from the dismantling of federal agencies. The media eats it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Actually as someone who believes The Constitution is as relevant today as it was when it was written, I would be happy to see the MASSIVE FEDERAL OVERREACH of the past 16 years get dismantled.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So, when is the FBI going to tell us that it heard what you said maybe they heard? Maybe they're afraid of Trump. Maybe Trump asked the Russians to hack the FBI, and he's got info that the FBI I colluding with the Dems. Gosh--the number of maybe's is hyuge. Make a good movie.
Lol. You're getting infatuated with me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lol. You're getting infatuated with me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:love:

James Clapper, who left his post when Mr Trump took office on 20 January, told NBC's Meet the Press: "There was no such wire-tap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time, as a candidate, or against his campaign."
He said that as intelligence director he would have known about any "court order on something like this. Absolutely, I can deny it".
But he added: "I can't speak for other authorised entities in the government or a state or local entity."




The White House on Sunday called on Congress to investigate whether former President Obama abused his executive powers in connection with the 2016 campaign, but continued to offer no evidence to back up the claim. is that how this works you throw the rock(with out supporting evidence ) and ask for congress to investigate the person you hit with your rock???? how about they investigate you for making false statements or abuse of power

and this is only 3 months in ... Sorry men The democrats aren't as good as Republicans when it comes to BS investigations to dis credit their opponents... Trump is not making this hard

Wonder how long the FBI director will last, now that he has come out stating there was not wire tapping of the Trump campaign. I find it so ironic that all the crying about fake news from him, is likely the only source he has on this accusation. Man would I love to be a fly on the wall while he throws his next oval office temper tantrum.

I don't like the man, I never have, but it concerns me that he just can't STFU and start to govern instead of picking fights. I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't feel good that this is the guy who needs to deal with threats in the middle east, North Korea or Russia flexing their muscles.

and this is only 3 months in ...

the fun has just begun

Sorry men The democrats aren't as good as Republicans when it comes to BS investigations to dis credit their opponents...

this is very amusing:huh:


seems there was surveillance of the Orange One

The Obama Camp’s Disingenuous Denials on FISA Surveillance of Trump

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445504/obama-camp-disingenuous-denials-fisa-surveillance-trump

Maybe someone can find that "secret" plan Trump had to defear ISIS since it seems to have disappeared.

Maybe someone can find that "secret" plan Trump had to defear ISIS since it seems to have disappeared.

Deflection
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Deflection
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In other words, moving the goalpost. But Paul does have that unique investigative power so lacking in the rest of us. He can even see a secret plan disappearing. Amazing power. I can see how, with such power, he doesn't need to substantiate what he says. It's just that he has this supernatural power to see things the rest of us can't.

In other words, moving the goalpost. But Paul does have that unique investigative power so lacking in the rest of us. He can even see a secret plan disappearing. Amazing power. I can see how, with such power, he doesn't need to substantiate what he says. It's just that he has this supernatural power to see things the rest of us can't.

I'm worried about our troops that are in harms way bc Pres. Trump hasn't released the secret plan that he promised us. Don't you care about the troops?

I'm worried about our troops that are in harms way bc Pres. Trump hasn't released the secret plan that he promised us. Don't you care about the troops?

If its Secret, and he releases it, wouldn't THAT lead to our troops being in harms way?

Don't you care about the troops. :hee:

At least he's keeping it off of the e-mail server that's in the closet.

If its Secret, and he releases it, wouldn't THAT lead to our troops being in harms way?

Don't you care about the troops. :hee:

At least he's keeping it off of the e-mail server that's in the closet.

great point

I didn't ask that he release it to me. I was removed from the list of people authorized to implement war plans.

How about releasing it to the Generals?:spin::spin:

this is very amusing:huh:


seems there was surveillance of the Orange One

The Obama Camp’s Disingenuous Denials on FISA Surveillance of Trump

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445504/obama-camp-disingenuous-denials-fisa-surveillance-trump

Doesn't the sheer premise of this article concern anyone? If this surveillance is a true story, then there was probable cause to assume that Trump and/or his associates were colluding with Russian government officials, despite hard line sanctions coming from the US to Moscow.

Doesn't the sheer premise of this article concern anyone? If this surveillance is a true story, then there was probable cause to assume that Trump and/or his associates were colluding with Russian government officials, despite hard line sanctions coming from the US to Moscow.

yeah...but that would mean Trump was telling the truth which goes against the mantra and narrative....

the Obama admin has a record....

WikiLeaks released the following list on February 23rd of Obama Administration wire taps:

* The US National Security Agency bugged a private climate change strategy meeting; between UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin;
* Obama bugged Chief of Staff of UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for long term interception targetting his Swiss phone;
* Obama singled out the Director of the Rules Division of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Johann Human, and targetted his Swiss phone for long term interception;
* Obama stole sensitive Italian diplomatic cables detailing how Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu implored Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to help patch up his relationship with US President Barack Obama, who was refusing to talk to Netanyahu;
* Obama intercepted top EU and Japanese trade ministers discussing their secret strategy and red lines to stop the US “extort[ing]” them at the WTO Doha arounds (the talks subsequently collapsed);
* Obama explicitly targeted five other top EU economic officials for long term interception, including their French, Austrian and Belgium phone numbers;
* Obama explicitly targetted the phones of Italy’s ambassador to NATO and other top Italian officials for long term interception; and
* Obama intercepted details of a critical private meeting between then French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Merkel and Berluscon, where the latter was told the Italian banking system was ready to “pop like a cork”.

In addition to the above list we also know now that Obama wire tapped various individuals in the US media that were reporting information not flattering to the Obama Administration. It is widely known that Obama’s Justice Department targeted journalists with wiretaps in 2013:

* In 2013 the liberal Washington Post expressed outrage after the revelation that the Justice Department had investigated the newsgathering activities of a Fox News reporter as a potential crime in a probe of classified leaks. The reporter, Fox News’ James Rosen and his family, were part of an investigation into government officials anonymously leaking information to journalists. Rosen was not charged but his movements and actions were tracked.
* Also in 2013, members of the Associated Press were also a target of the surveillance. The ultra liberal New Yorker even noted that “In moderate and liberal circles, at least, the phone-records scandal, partly because it involves the dear old A.P. and partly because it raises anew the specter of Big Brother, may well present the most serious threat to Obama’s reputation.”
* Reporter Sharyl Attkisson said in 2014 that her personal computer and CBS laptop were hacked after she began filing stories about Benghazi that were unflattering to the Obama administration. A source who checked her laptop said the hacker used spyware “proprietary to a government agency,” according to an article in the New York Post.

I didn't ask that he release it to me. I was removed from the list of people authorized to implement war plans.

How about releasing it to the Generals?:spin::spin:

you are struggling with the meaning of "secret" aren't you?

lets get Wayne to copy and paste a definition :jester:

this is very amusing:huh:


seems there was surveillance of the Orange One

The Obama Camp’s Disingenuous Denials on FISA Surveillance of Trump

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445504/obama-camp-disingenuous-denials-fisa-surveillance-trump


"I can't speak for other authorised entities in the government or a state or local entity."

Obama doesn't have absolute powers bit it appears many think he does

and seeing you like definitions her is another one

The FISA Court is very different. Created by Section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, the purpose of the FISC is to “hear applications for and grant orders approving electronic surveillance anywhere within the United States.” The court makes its own rules and operates in secret..

And the COURT not the POTUS

approves the warrant

just saw this http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39175962


FBI Director James Comey has requested that the Justice Department publicly deny President Trump's allegation that President Barack Obama had ordered a wiretap of candidate Trump,

To summarize, reporting indicates that, prior to June 2016, the Obama Justice Department and FBI considered a criminal investigation of Trump associates, and perhaps Trump himself, based on concerns about connections to Russian financial institutions. Preliminary poking around indicated that there was nothing criminal involved. Rather than shut the case down, though, the Obama Justice Department converted it into a national-security investigation under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

We should just ask the person who told Pres. Trump. I know he hates it when people use anonymous sources so I'm sure his tweet mentioned the name.

We should just ask the person who told Pres. Trump. I know he hates it when people use anonymous sources so I'm sure his tweet mentioned the name.

appears as though this was widely known and not a secret ;)

How about releasing it to the Generals?:spin::spin:

How do you know he hasn't?

How do you know he hasn't?

Because then he can't criticize him for not sharing it with the generals.

The man has been in office for a couple of months. I don't like the paranoid tweets, his vulgar language, I don't like how thin-skinned he is (so was Obama, who never ever let a criticism pass).

But isn't it common for them to outline vague plans (especially early on), before releasing the details? Can we at least pretend to apply the same standards to Trump that were applied to his predecessors?

With all the crap the Democrats have done from getting the questions before the debates to sabotaging Bernie Sanders campaign, does anybody really doubt that they didn't try to spy on Donald Trump? Hell they even illegally stole his tax information .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2eu-B5ZNPs

How do you know he hasn't?

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;1118180]Because then he can't criticize him for not sharing it with the generals.


But isn't it common for them to outline vague plans (especially early on), before releasing the details? Can we at least pretend to apply the same standards to Trump that were applied to his predecessors?

He certianly doesn't have to tell me what the secret plans are but why not tell us that he has released them? If he did release them, what the heck is taking so long for the Generals to implement them - we have soldiers at risk plus civilians and Iraqi soldiers are dying? Why did he recently say he was going to ask the Generals to come up with a plan w/in 30 days? He has stated he has low regard for the Generals, so why would he want to see their plans?

[

He certianly doesn't have to tell me what the secret plans are but why not tell us that he has released them? If he did release them, what the heck is taking so long for the Generals to implement them

moving those goal posts around again:confused:

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;1118180]Because then he can't criticize him for not sharing it with the generals.


But isn't it common for them to outline vague plans (especially early on), before releasing the details? Can we at least pretend to apply the same standards to Trump that were applied to his predecessors?

He certianly doesn't have to tell me what the secret plans are but why not tell us that he has released them? If he did release them, what the heck is taking so long for the Generals to implement them - we have soldiers at risk plus civilians and Iraqi soldiers are dying? Why did he recently say he was going to ask the Generals to come up with a plan w/in 30 days? He has stated he has low regard for the Generals, so why would he want to see their plans?

Maybe you didn't understand Trumpist use of words when referred to the generals. He did appoint a couple of Generals as national Security Adviser. How do you know that the plan is not in place. And that it is not being implemented?

He said "I know more about ISIS than the generals do". Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?

He said "I know more about ISIS than the generals do". Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?

he's always saying funny stuff

He said "I know more about ISIS than the generals do". Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?

Knowing more about ISIS (whatever Trump means by that) doe not mean he knows how to create a military plan to defeat it. He did appoint two generals as National Security Adviser. Must not have as low regard for generals as you claim he does. Were you lying again?

Knowing more about ISIS (whatever Trump means by that) doe not mean he knows how to create a military plan to defeat it. He did appoint two generals as National Security Adviser. Must not have as low regard for generals as you claim he does. Were you lying again?

So where did I lie?

So where did I lie?

If we apply the standard for lying that you apply to Trump, I do not know where to begin.

moving those goal posts around again:confused:

at this rate...well....I don't know of a single NFL kicker that can boot a 175 yard Field Goal

He said "I know more about ISIS than the generals do". Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?

Marine Biologists know more about fish than fishermen do...but yet we let the fishermen catch them. :hee:

Were you lying again?

If we apply the standard for lying that you apply to Trump, I do not know where to begin.

So let's give it a try. I have 45 min. until I leave for the day.

With all the crap the Democrats have done from getting the questions before the debates to sabotaging Bernie Sanders campaign, does anybody really doubt that they didn't try to spy on Donald Trump? Hell they even illegally stole his tax information .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If it turns out in the end the Trump campaign staff and possibly Trump himself, were in fact getting help from Russia to influence the election, the wire tap FISA order (if it happened) would certainly be justified. I certainly would be 100% behind any surveillance of Russian influence to deliberately influence our electoral process. As long as it was requested through the correct process, approved for national security reasons and in front of the proper judicial court; not done in a Tricky #^&#^&#^&#^& manor.

So let's give it a try. I have 45 min. until I leave for the day.

OK. You said "He has stated he has low regard for the Generals, so why would he want to see their plans?" And then you said "He said 'I know more about ISIS than the generals do'. Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?'

I stipulated that we apply the standard for lying that you apply to Trump. Since he appointed two generals to National Security Adviser, and since he asks the generals to come up with a plan, it is obvious that he does not have a low regard for them. And since, as has been pointed out in a couple of posts above, knowing more about ISIS doesn't mean knowing best on how to create a plan to defeat it. Nor that he wouldn't or shouldn't ask the generals to do it.

Now, I may kind of know what you are trying to say, or trying to twist, but when Trump says something he believes to be true, and actually often is, but it comes out in such a way that it seems contradictory or ambiguous or "not true," then he is accused of lying. You also have done that.

So applying to you that standard for lying which is applied by his opponents to Trump and by you . . . you lied.

That is the "lie" I referred to in this instance. I pointed out other of your Trump like "lies" in the post you could not finish or even read more than two sentences of it. And there have been other posts where I have pointed out the same kind of "lies" by you. Of course, you may not have read those either. So what difference does it make?

Some say ignorance is bliss. Stay happy.

If it turns out in the end the Trump campaign staff and possibly Trump himself, were in fact getting help from Russia to influence the election, the wire tap FISA order (if it happened) would certainly be justified. I certainly would be 100% behind any surveillance of Russian influence to deliberately influence our electoral process. As long as it was requested through the correct process, approved for national security reasons and in front of the proper judicial court; not done in a Tricky #^&#^&#^&#^& manor.

That's a lot of "ifs" and it would've been done politically to influence the outcome of the election . Let's remember that the Justice Department had become a political instrument of the Obama administration and was clearly used to further Obama's agenda.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Every news cast if filled with a lot of IFS, hopefully the BS comes to an end soon and we know the facts.

Every news cast if filled with a lot of IFS, hopefully the BS comes to an end soon and we know the facts.

In an unrelated story speaking of bull#^&#^&#^&#^& that makes you laugh , I just watched Chuck Schumer say of the GOP's health care repeal bill " they don't want the American people to know what's in it and they're just trying to rush it through ". Lmao
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I love it Trump accuses Obama of a crime and the right line up behind him like sheep ..... the name Obama fires something off something in the brain of his supporter that completely shut of the part that deal with reason and Facts ..

They require hard evidence against Trump but no such standard exist . when it come to Trump makes claims ????? just add Obama in the statement and it becomes Truth

Speaking about Truth and Facts :

Can the POTUS single - handedly order the surveillance of an American citizen

Trump supporters : YES

The law and everyone else : NO

That's a lot of "ifs" and it would've been done politically to influence the outcome of the election . Let's remember that the Justice Department had become a political instrument of the Obama administration and was clearly used to further Obama's agenda.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're right, it's much easier to believe that the president illegally manipulated multiple branches of government to spy on a rival than it would be to believe that a man, surrounded by people colluding with Russians (and hiding it) would have had legal probable cause to have communications with those surrogates monitored by the FBI/DOJ. Clearly this is the only reasonable explanation, and any facts that lead us from this already foregone conclusion are only manufactured by those in our shadow government who will do anything to protect the real truth from coming out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump did a nice job co-opting "fake news" from the left...he should acquire "facts and truth" as being exclusively his and really send them through the roof...:rotf3:

You're right, it's much easier to believe that the president illegally manipulated multiple branches of government to spy on a rival than it would be to believe that a man, surrounded by people colluding with Russians (and hiding it) would have had legal probable cause to have communications with those surrogates monitored by the FBI/DOJ. Clearly this is the only reasonable explanation, and any facts that lead us from this already foregone conclusion are only manufactured by those in our shadow government who will do anything to protect the real truth from coming out.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And your evidence that Trump surrogates were colluding with Russia would be ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And your evidence that Trump surrogates were colluding with Russia would be ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That they met with them.

When Democratic Senators meet with Russians, they are just doing their job. And doing a damn fine job, at that.

When Senator Jeff Sessions meets with the Russians, he is up to no good. No other possible explanation. Got it?

I thought the left went a bit funny in the head when Bush was president. Now, they have become completely un-glued, non-stop conspiracy theories and tin-foil hat paranoia. They are deep, deep into the Twilight Zone. They are making Howard Dean look rational and grounded.

OK. You said "He has stated he has low regard for the Generals, so why would he want to see their plans?" And then you said "He said 'I know more about ISIS than the generals do'. Those are his words, not mine.Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?'

I stipulated that we apply the standard for lying that you apply to Trump. Since he appointed two generals to National Security Adviser, and since he asks the generals to come up with a plan, it is obvious that he does not have a low regard for themYet he clearly demonstrated that by insulting them.. And since, as has been pointed out in a couple of posts above, knowing more about ISIS doesn't mean knowing best on how to create a plan to defeat it. Nor that he wouldn't or shouldn't ask the generals to do it.

Now, I may kind of know what you are trying to say, or trying to twistnot trying to twist anything - Trump said those things., but when Trump says something he believes to be true, and actually often is, but it comes out in such a way that it seems contradictory or ambiguous or "not true," then he is accused of lying. You also have done that.

So applying to you that standard for lying which is applied by his opponents to Trump and by you . . . you liedThat is so weak it is funny. It is nothing more than an insult - something you seem to do well with anyone who disagrees with you or critizes Trump. .

That is the "lie" I referred to in this instance. I pointed out other of your Trump like "lies" in the post you could not finish or even read more than two sentences of itI tried reading that but it was so discombolated it was next to impossible to finish.. And there have been other posts where I have pointed out the same kind of "lies" by you. Of course, you may not have read those either. So what difference does it make?

Some say ignorance is bliss. Stay happy.

And you end with another insult.

Originally Posted by detbuch
OK. You said "He has stated he has low regard for the Generals, so why would he want to see their plans?" And then you said "He said 'I know more about ISIS than the generals do'. PaulS: Those are his words, not mine.Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?'

You quoted some of his words which you claim show low regard for the generals. His words did not show low regard for them. They show that he knew something better than them. And his actions show that he had high regard for them. By using the standard for lying which you apply to Trump, you lied.

I stipulated that we apply the standard for lying that you apply to Trump. Since he appointed two generals to National Security Adviser, and since he asks the generals to come up with a plan, it is obvious that he does not have a low regard for them PaulS: Yet he clearly demonstrated that by insulting them..

He did not insult them, as I pointed out above, and his actions actually praised them. Again, you lie.

And since, as has been pointed out in a couple of posts above, knowing more about ISIS doesn't mean knowing best on how to create a plan to defeat it. Nor that he wouldn't or shouldn't ask the generals to do it.

Now, I may kind of know what you are trying to say, or trying to twist PaulS: not trying to twist anything - Trump said those things.,

You twisted what he said to make it seem he had "low regard"--if Trump did that, you would call it a lie.

but when Trump says something he believes to be true, and actually often is, but it comes out in such a way that it seems contradictory or ambiguous or "not true," then he is accused of lying. You also have done that.

So applying to you that standard for lying which is applied by his opponents to Trump and by you . . . you lied PaulS: That is so weak it is funny. It is nothing more than an insult - something you seem to do well with anyone who disagrees with you or critizes Trump. .


That's your opinion. An insulting one at that.

That is the "lie" I referred to in this instance. I pointed out other of your Trump like "lies" in the post you could not finish or even read more than two sentences of it I tried reading that but it was so discombolated it was next to impossible to finish..

That doesn't change the fact that you "lie" in the same way that you say Trump lies.

And there have been other posts where I have pointed out the same kind of "lies" by you. Of course, you may not have read those either. So what difference does it make?

Some say ignorance is bliss. Stay happy.
And you end with another insult.

If you didn't read my post, that rendered you ignorant of what was in it. If the truth of your ignorance is an insult to you, then you have a problem with the truth. In the same manner that you appear to think Trump has a problem with it. And if wishing you to stay happy is an insult, then I apologize and retract that wish.

More insults. So where did I claim Trump lied in this tread in releations to the comments he made that I posted? You are the one who tried to claim I said he lied here - which I never said. He certainly did state his low regard for the generals (and POWs). His appointing Generals does not show high regard for Generals

A Trump lie would be like how he claimed w/o evidence that 0000s of people of people were bused across states lines to vote.

Good ahead throw out more insults.

Are you gonna send me another apology like the last one?

More insults.

Good ahead throw out more insults.

Are you gonna send me another apology like the last one?

reminded me of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9jdezxALNI

a man, surrounded by people colluding with Russians
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

James Clapper, Obama's head of National Intelligence, said he has not seen any evidence of anyone in the Trump campaign colluding with Russians.

James Clapper, Obama's head of National Intelligence, said he has not seen any evidence of anyone in the Trump campaign colluding with Russians.

meanwhile.....

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-03-07/nsa-whistleblower-bill-binney-says-trump-is-absolutely-right-about-wiretap-claims

Originally Posted by detbuch
OK. You said "He has stated he has low regard for the Generals, so why would he want to see their plans?" And then you said "He said 'I know more about ISIS than the generals do'. PaulS: Those are his words, not mine.Why would he put our soldiers at risk by letting someone who knows less then he does develop a plan?'

You quoted some of his words which you claim show low regard for the generals. His words did not show low regard for them. They show that he knew something better than them. And his actions show that he had high regard for them. By using the standard for lying which you apply to Trump, you lied.

I stipulated that we apply the standard for lying that you apply to Trump. Since he appointed two generals to National Security Adviser, and since he asks the generals to come up with a plan, it is obvious that he does not have a low regard for them PaulS: Yet he clearly demonstrated that by insulting them..

He did not insult them, as I pointed out above, and his actions actually praised them. Again, you lie.

And since, as has been pointed out in a couple of posts above, knowing more about ISIS doesn't mean knowing best on how to create a plan to defeat it. Nor that he wouldn't or shouldn't ask the generals to do it.

Now, I may kind of know what you are trying to say, or trying to twist PaulS: not trying to twist anything - Trump said those things.,

You twisted what he said to make it seem he had "low regard"--if Trump did that, you would call it a lie.

but when Trump says something he believes to be true, and actually often is, but it comes out in such a way that it seems contradictory or ambiguous or "not true," then he is accused of lying. You also have done that.

So applying to you that standard for lying which is applied by his opponents to Trump and by you . . . you lied PaulS: That is so weak it is funny. It is nothing more than an insult - something you seem to do well with anyone who disagrees with you or critizes Trump. .


That's your opinion. An insulting one at that.

That is the "lie" I referred to in this instance. I pointed out other of your Trump like "lies" in the post you could not finish or even read more than two sentences of it I tried reading that but it was so discombolated it was next to impossible to finish..

That doesn't change the fact that you "lie" in the same way that you say Trump lies.

And there have been other posts where I have pointed out the same kind of "lies" by you. Of course, you may not have read those either. So what difference does it make?

Some say ignorance is bliss. Stay happy.
And you end with another insult.

If you didn't read my post, that rendered you ignorant of what was in it. If the truth of your ignorance is an insult to you, then you have a problem with the truth. In the same manner that you appear to think Trump has a problem with it. And if wishing you to stay happy is an insult, then I apologize and retract that wish.

I think you two need to book a room, either make love or kick the political crap out of one another.

More help from the Russians and their pet Snowden for Trump to assist with his Baseless wire tap claim or just Coincidence

That they met with them.

When Democratic Senators meet with Russians, they are just doing their job. And doing a damn fine job, at that.

When Senator Jeff Sessions meets with the Russians, he is up to no good. No other possible explanation. Got it?

I thought the left went a bit funny in the head when Bush was president. Now, they have become completely un-glued, non-stop conspiracy theories and tin-foil hat paranoia. They are deep, deep into the Twilight Zone. They are making Howard Dean look rational and grounded.

Thank you, you've proven my point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you two need to book a room, either make love or kick the political crap out of one another.

Go back and look at whenever I post, he almost always responds to me. I think it is infatuation.

Trump Loved Snowden as did several people here when the emails were about Clinton.. he was providing a great service exposing Her

Are they still looking Snowden in the same Light ???? with the CIA leaks

Trump Loved Snowden as did several people here when the emails were about Clinton.. he was providing a great service exposing Her

Are they still looking Snowden in the same Light ???? with the CIA leaks

Now that you bring up leaks, through what light are you looking at the classified leaks being used to imply that Trump colluded with the Russians? Should we find out who the leakers are and prosecute them?

More help from the Russians and their pet Snowden for Trump to assist with his Baseless wire tap claim or just Coincidence

Seems they have taken hold of the Snowden life ring

Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway says she doesn’t have any evidence to support President Donald Trump’s claim that Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower phone lines during the election.

Instead, Conway is pointing to recent revelations about other government surveillance to suggest it was possible Obama used a different technique.


She explained on USA Today: “What I can say is there are many ways to surveil each other.

“You can surveil someone through their phones, certainly through their television sets — any number of ways.”

The advisor then claimed monitoring could be done with “microwaves that turn into cameras”, adding: “We know this is a fact of modern life.”

Now that you bring up leaks, through what light are you looking at the classified leaks being used to imply that Trump colluded with the Russians? Should we find out who the leakers are and prosecute them?

the leaks are not the only thing being used to imply Trumps people may have colluded ... how many different advisors met with the Russian

5 or 6 said no then said yes ?

But seem some see a leak as leak and the contents in that leak have equal weight..

Leaks against Obama ,Hillary, good:kewl:

Leaks against Trump Bad :sleeps:

But seem some see a leak as leak and the contents in that leak have equal weight..



Snowden is charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property.

So you are saying those currently within our government leaking info should be charged similarly ....right?

Snowden is charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property.

So you are saying those currently within our government leaking info should be charged similarly ....right?


It seems we will have to see how this play out can you commit Treason
by exposing Treason ??

It seems we will have to see how this play out can you commit Treason
by exposing Treason ??

you really need to switch to decaf :uhuh:

Snowden is charged with two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property.

So you are saying those currently within our government leaking info should be charged similarly ....right?

I couldn't get him, (or PaulS) to answer that question. Maybe you can.

He accuses others of "verbal gymnastics, yet he regularly does the verbal jumps and flips. He accuses others of the "chicken little" ploy, yet he regularly warns of the dangers of Trump.

So it's no surprise that he'll evade a simple question by playing the equivalency card. After all, the leaks and contacts with Russians IMPLY (as wdmso said) that Trump and his people colluded with the Russians, even though there is no evidence that they did (nor any reason to imply so unless we just want to).

Can't remember, but it seems the leaks re Hillary and the Dems were specific, not mere implications. And the contents of the leaks were provided, not implied. One wonders, if the leaks re Trump had actual content that showed collusion, why was that content not revealed? Oh well, that only leaves us room to imply. And demand investigations to satisfy concocted implications. Gee, I wonder if I'm doing verbal gymnastics.

Not sure, but isn't there a far greater national security threat when our own security agencies leak stuff about us than when the Russians do it? Naahh . . . the implication of each must be equivalent. Even so, it's the Russian stuff that should worry us and must be investigated.

I couldn't get him, (or PaulS) to answer that question. Maybe you can.

He accuses others of "verbal gymnastics, yet he regularly does the verbal jumps and flips. He accuses others of the "chicken little" ploy, yet he regularly warns of the dangers of Trump.

So it's no surprise that he'll evade a simple question by playing the equivalency card. After all, the leaks and contacts with Russians IMPLY (as wdmso said) that Trump and his people colluded with the Russians, even though there is no evidence that they did (nor any reason to imply so unless we just want to).

Can't remember, but it seems the leaks re Hillary and the Dems were specific, not mere implications. And the contents of the leaks were provided, not implied. One wonders, if the leaks re Trump had actual content that showed collusion, why was that content not revealed? Oh well, that only leaves us room to imply. And demand investigations to satisfy concocted implications. Gee, I wonder if I'm doing verbal gymnastics.

Not sure, but isn't there a far greater national security threat when our own security agencies leak stuff about us than when the Russians do it? Naahh . . . the implication of each must be equivalent. Even so, it's the Russian stuff that should worry us and must be investigated.

your to funny looking for answers based on implication of each must be equivalent .. then say I am using the playing the equivalency card.

please show me.... you and Scott are playing that Hand not I

I warned of the pitfalls of the right supporting the Snowden leaks against Hillary and the DNC .. and how the right would react when the barrel of the same gun was pointing at them ... And true to form now they play the victim demanding evidence of wrong doing or its a witch hunt .. burn the leakers at the stake it very telling..

And yes Trump is dangerous

but one must ask are the leaks against Trump Treason if they expose treason ...(we'll find out after the investigation concludes ) then we can move on to prosecution of leakers.. if warranted I love how The right dont like due process

What should happen to Trump if his claim is found to be false
"even though there is no evidence that they did" Tap his phones ??

thats Statement you used to defend Trump about collusion

your to funny looking for answers based on implication of each must be equivalent .. then say I am using the playing the equivalency card.

please show me.... you and Scott are playing that Hand not I

Please clarify.

I warned of the pitfalls of the right supporting the Snowden leaks against Hillary and the DNC .. and how the right would react when the barrel of the same gun was pointing at them ... And true to form now they play the victim demanding evidence of wrong doing or its a witch hunt .. burn the leakers at the stake it very telling..

Who the Hades are you talking about? Who is DEMANDING evidence? I am saying what is being said--there is no evidence. That is not a demand for evidence. I am wondering why there is such a frenzied fuss when there is no evidence.

And yes Trump is dangerous

Because you say so? OK . . . that's an opening for you to come up with another of your chicken little accusations.

but one must ask are the leaks against Trump Treason if they expose treason ...(we'll find out after the investigation concludes )

Why must one ask if the leaks are treason? It is illegal to pass classified information to those not authorized to receive it. The investigation does not have to conclude in order to know that classified information has been leaked to unauthorized persons. That it was leaked is the only evidence that a crime has been committed--the leaks.

The leaks, as they are, show NO treason by Trump. If there had been something treasonous discovered by surveilling Trump, why was that not leaked? Why was only innocuous stuff leaked (ILLEGALLY) and not the real supposedly treasonous stuff? And why was the not treasonous stuff, the kind of thing that has happened before even by Democrats, a reason for "implication" and investigation?

then we can move on to prosecution of leakers.. if warranted I love how The right dont like due process

It is not due process to investigate a crime if there is no evidence that a crime has been committed. That is the opposite of due process.

What should happen to Trump if his claim is found to be false
"even though there is no evidence that they did" Tap his phones ??

thats Statement you used to defend Trump about collusion

I don't recall defending Trump if his claim is false. I don't know if he should be prosecuted because a claim of his is false. I don't think someone can be prosecuted for making a false claim unless he is under oath at the time, and actually knew that the claim is false.

I don't know if his claim is passing on classified information. Maybe the investigation will show that his claim has revealed classified information. If so, then, like the leakers against Trump, he and they should be prosecuted.

I don't recall defending Trump if his claim is false.

me either :huh:

I don't know if he should be prosecuted because a claim of his is false.



almost never happens in Washington :hee:

I am wondering why there is such a frenzied fuss when there is no evidence.

Ask Trump he made the claim: Trump Administration Asks For More Time To Provide Proof That Obama Wiretapped Trump Talk about move the goal posts

I am wondering why there is such a frenzied fuss when there is no evidence.



answer the question yourself...you continually bring it up here and it's the "frenzied" leftist media and democrats that "fuss" about it on a daily basis

for Trump...it's like throwing a steak to the guard dog while you do whatever you want :jester:

answer the question yourself...you continually bring it up here and it's the "frenzied" leftist media and democrats that "fuss" about it on a daily basis

for Trump...it's like throwing a steak to the guard dog while you do whatever you want :jester:


that was detbuch quote not mine

and now we have the same old same old now they are again telling us what Trump ment ..

Sean Spicer said Mr Trump had broadly meant "surveillance and other activities" when he made the allegation in a tweet earlier this month.
He also suggested the president was not accusing his predecessor specifically.

I understand it must get getting old to have to defend or excuse trumps comments day in and day out ... heres an Idea maybe he can stop lying every time he opens his mouth or shoots off a Tweet

that was detbuch quote not mine



then you should use "quotes"...

that was detbuch quote not mine

why are the media and the Dems making such a frenzied fuss over something for which there is no evidence? Can you answer that? Doubt that you will. As for Trump's fuss over something for which there is no evidence, I am sure you will incessantly have something to say about that

and now we have the same old same old now they are again telling us what Trump ment ..

Sean Spicer said Mr Trump had broadly meant "surveillance and other activities" when he made the allegation in a tweet earlier this month.

That's an answer to a question. Something you mostly avoid doing. Your choice if you don't want to believe it. His answer sounds reasonable to me.

He also suggested the president was not accusing his predecessor specifically.

It was clarified right after he said Obama did it, not only by Trumps staff, but by various media outlets that when the President's name is attached to an action, it most often means his administration, not specifically or only Obama.

I understand it must get getting old to have to defend or excuse trumps comments day in and day out ... heres an Idea maybe he can stop lying every time he opens his mouth or shoots off a Tweet

Not as tiring as having to answer stuff that is politically motivated to make Trump look bad. Even stuff like calling everything he says is a lie . . . that he's a racist . . . a homophobe . . . an anti-Semite . . . blah, blah, blah.

And it gets tiresome to give detailed answers to your questions or posts which refute, point by point, all of your statements, but from which you pick only one point, if any, to respond to--as you did again here.

Not as tiring as having to answer stuff that is politically motivated to make Trump look bad. Even stuff like calling everything he says is a lie . . . that he's a racist . . . a homophobe . . . an anti-Semite . . . blah, blah, blah.

And it gets tiresome to give detailed answers to your questions or posts which refute, point by point, all of your statements, but from which you pick only one point, if any, to respond to--as you did again here.

nm

why are the media and the Dems making such a frenzied fuss over something for which there is no evidence? Can you answer that? Doubt that you will.

I have.. there is evidence Trumps people spoke to the russians and denied it some have resigned over it whats not Clear or (evidence) what those conversations were about... hence the investigation to see if there was collusion....




As for Trump's fuss over something for which there is no evidence, I am sure you will incessantly have something to say about that

you need to catch up I have all ready been pointing that out from the start of this thread

and now we have the same old same old now they are again telling us what Trump ment ..

Sean Spicer said Mr Trump had broadly meant "surveillance and other activities" when he made the allegation in a tweet earlier this month.

That's an answer to a question. Something you mostly avoid doing. Your choice if you don't want to believe it. His answer sounds reasonable to me.

WOW thats amazing the POTUS comments cary no weight when spoken.. but the explanation a week later sound reasonable when he press Sec says it??

He also suggested the president was not accusing his predecessor specifically.

Here are the actual Tweets how is this not accusing his predecessor specifically???

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

I have.. there is evidence Trumps people spoke to the russians and denied it some have resigned over it whats not Clear or (evidence) what those conversations were about... hence the investigation to see if there was collusion

Speaking to the Russians, which has been done for years by members of both parties, is not evidence of collusion. No evidence was found.

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!

You're right, it does sound like he was specifically suggesting Obama had him wire tapped.

There are "no indications" that Trump Tower was under surveillance by the US government before or after the election, a Senate committee has said.

But White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Mr Trump maintains his claims.

The press secretary refused to accept the Senate Intelligence Committee report, saying "they're not findings".
Mr Spicer quoted at length from an unproven Fox News report suggesting Mr Obama had dodged US restrictions by asking Britain's GCHQ electronic surveillance agency to monitor Mr Trump, an allegation already dismissed as "utterly ridiculous" by the Cheltenham-based complex.

Spicer has a miserable job, can't imagine how he sleeps at night, wondering what Tweet he has to translate at the next press conference. At times as we have seen, he can't even keep a straight face, hard to do that when you know the POTUS quote (er meaning) of the day you are about to relay to the core is total BS.

So ironic that with all Trumps bitching and moaning about fake news, that he is now back peddling on his wire tapping accusation; hey folks I was just relaying whats been reported on several outlets. The POTUS should not be reacting to anything he reads without someone spending some time checking out the source. Clearly he needs to choose his words more clearly, really dumb to accuse the former president personally of an illegal activity if you didn't really mean it. Where is all the extreme feting, due some fact checking before you open your big mouth and say exactly what you mean; you are POTUS for crying out loud.

Clearly he needs to choose his words more clearly, really dumb to accuse the former president personally of an illegal activity if you didn't really mean it. .

THAT is an understatement. He's not a reality TV personality anymore for Gods sake. Who is advising this guy on these tweets?

I think he has the potential to be one of the most productive presidents of the last 40 years, but he needs to start acting a little bit more maturely and responsibly.

That being said, someone leaked the Flynn conversation, and someone leaked his income taxes. There are some circles in the government that are working against him. And the media...I don't even know what to say. He could stop at a red light, and MSNBC would spend 15 minutes speculating on what his sinister intentions were for stopping at the light. They are treating him like a cartoon villain.

Spicer has a miserable job, can't imagine how he sleeps at night, wondering what Tweet he has to translate at the next press conference. At times as we have seen, he can't even keep a straight face, hard to do that when you know the POTUS quote (er meaning) of the day you are about to relay to the core is total BS.

So ironic that with all Trumps bitching and moaning about fake news, that he is now back peddling on his wire tapping accusation; hey folks I was just relaying whats been reported on several outlets. The POTUS should not be reacting to anything he reads without someone spending some time checking out the source. Clearly he needs to choose his words more clearly, really dumb to accuse the former president personally of an illegal activity if you didn't really mean it. Where is all the extreme feting, due some fact checking before you open your big mouth and say exactly what you mean; you are POTUS for crying out loud.

My brother graduated from Connecticut College in 1993 with Sean Spicer (very small school), knew him well. It was a liberal place, my brother tried to start a conservative club and was denied school funding. Spicer, who was a member of the student senate, basically forced the school to give my brother the funding, saying they couldn't give money to liberal clubs and deny money to a conservative club. In response to that, the school newspaper started referring to Sean Spicer as "Sean Sphincter". Very mature. The media picked that up recently, they thought it was great that a student newspaper gave him a derogatory nickname 25 years ago. Ah, those tolerant liberals. The Hartford Courant thought this was "news".

http://www.courant.com/politics/capitol-watch/hc-sean-spicer-connecticut-college-story.html

That being said, someone leaked the Flynn conversationHe liked leaks until it happened to him., and someone leaked his income taxesI heard some people think it was related to a law suit where Trump sued a reporter or author who claimed Trump wasn't as wealthy as he said he was. I believe Trump had to provide a tax form in the suit.. There are some circles in the government that are working against him. And the media...I don't even know what to say. He could stop at a red light, and MSNBC would spend 15 minutes speculating on what his sinister intentions were for stopping at the light. They are treating him like a cartoon villain.

Hi is acting like a cartoon villain. He still wasn't realized that everything he says is going to be scrutinized. I guess bc his supports don't care.

I thought it was funny he mentioned McCarthy in his tweet where he accused someone of something w/o any evidence.

Hi is acting like a cartoon villain. He still wasn't realized that everything he says is going to be scrutinized. I guess bc his supports don't care.

I thought it was funny he mentioned McCarthy in his tweet where he accused someone of something w/o any evidence.

"He liked leaks until it happened to him"

It wasn't the US Government that leaked emails from the DNC. Here's a question that no one is asking about the Russians hacking the DNC. Were any of those leaked emails doctored? Was any of it untrue? If revealing things that the DNC did, hurt their campaign, isn't it fair to ask why they were engaging in those activities in the first place? Yes, the hacking was wrong and should be investigated. But if the Democrats weren't playing dirty, there would have been nothing to hack and nothing to leak.

" heard some people think it was related to a law suit where Trump sued "

I also heard Trump is an anti-Semite. Funny given that hos daughter Ivanka, who he clearly adores, is a Jew. So I'm not overly impressed with what you "hear" about him from the media. They have shed all credibility in their coverage of this guy.

"I believe Trump had to provide a tax form in the suit"

It's still illegal for anyone to share that without his permission.

How come all these people going bonkers over his taxes, couldn't care less that Obama didn't release his academic records from college, as most presidents have done? Not any concern at all about that. Have you "heard" anything about why that is.

"He is acting like a cartoon villain"

He is acting like a horse's ass. Very different from a villain. You watch MSNBC from 8:00 - 11:00 any night, and they will devote at least one-third of their air time dedicated to connecting him with the Russians. There is no evidence. There's no more evidence connecting him to the Russian hack of the DNC, than there is that Obama tapped Trump tower. Yet everyone is blasting Trump for accusing Obama for tapping him without evidence, bit no one is blasting the media for saying he is a KGB plant without evidence.

No double standard there. Nope.

Here is a crazy idea, Paul. How about we hold politicians to task when they are wrong, and we praise them when they do good. And we do that similarly, to people of both sides. Do you have any appreciation for how far away we are, from that? That only thing that comes close to that is on Foxnews, excluding Sean Hannity, who is a Trump puppet.

I watched Lawrence O'Donnell interview Shirley McLane last night, the two of them talking about how Trump is the second coming of Hitler. It was like taking a trip deep into the Twilight Zone.

funny that when he acts in the way that democrats portray every republican...the democrats get upset :jester:

"He liked leaks until it happened to him"

It wasn't the US Government that leaked emails from the DNC.true Here's a question that no one is asking about the Russians hacking the DNC. Were any of those leaked emails doctored? Was any of it untrue? If revealing things that the DNC did, hurt their campaign, isn't it fair to ask why they were engaging in those activities in the first place? Yes, the hacking was wrong and should be investigated. But if the Democrats weren't playing dirty, there would have been nothing to hack and nothing to leak. Nothing they did was illegal. Certainly they had a bias for Hillary and against Bernie. They thought she had a better chance.

" heard some people think it was related to a law suit where Trump sued "

I also heard Trump is an anti-Semite. Funny given that hos daughter Ivanka, who he clearly adores, is a Jew. So I'm not overly impressed with what you "hear" about him from the mediaOk, I'll remember that:wave:. They have shed all credibility in their coverage of this guy.

"I believe Trump had to provide a tax form in the suit"

It's still illegal for anyone to share that without his permission.

How come all these people going bonkers over his taxes, couldn't care less that Obama didn't release his academic records from college, as most presidents have done? Not any concern at all about that. Have you "heard" anything about why that is.:laugha:

"He is acting like a cartoon villain"

He is acting like a horse's ass. Very different from a villain. You watch MSNBC from 8:00 - 11:00 any night, and they will devote at least one-third of their air time dedicated to connecting him with the Russians. There is no evidence. There's no more evidence connecting him to the Russian hack of the DNC, than there is that Obama tapped Trump tower. Yet everyone is blasting Trump for accusing Obama for tapping him without evidence, bit no one is blasting the media for saying he is a KGB plant without evidence.They are not saying that so don't lie.

No double standard there. Nope.

Here is a crazy idea, Paul. How about we hold politicians to task when they are wrong, and we praise them when they do good. And we do that similarly, to people of both sides. Do you have any appreciation for how far away we are, from that? That only thing that comes close to that is on Foxnews, excluding Sean Hannity, who is a Trump puppet.And I remember all those post you praised Obama:laugha:

I watched Lawrence O'Donnell interview Shirley McLane last night, the two of them talking about how Trump is the second coming of Hitler. It was like taking a trip deep into the Twilight Zone.

The White House has tried to soothe an angry Britain after suggesting that President Barack Obama used London’s spy agency to conduct secret surveillance on President Trump while he was a candidate last year.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May said on Friday that “we’ve received assurances from the White House that these allegations would not be repeated.”

The GCHQ quickly and vehemently denied the contention in a rare statement issued by the spy agency on Thursday, calling the assertions “nonsense” and “utterly ridiculous.”

It's amazing how we believe what spy agencies tell us.

The White House has tried to soothe an angry Britain after suggesting that President Barack Obama used London’s spy agency to conduct secret surveillance on President Trump while he was a candidate last year.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May said on Friday that “we’ve received assurances from the White House that these allegations would not be repeated.”

The GCHQ quickly and vehemently denied the contention in a rare statement issued by the spy agency on Thursday, calling the assertions “nonsense” and “utterly ridiculous.”

"Nothing they (the media) did was illegal".

There is an amazing tendency of liberals, when backed into a corner, of answering a question that bears no resemblance to what was asked. I didn't ask if it was illegal. It was not illegal for CNN to get debate questions ahead of time to Hilary. But if when that story breaks, all you care about is how it broke, and you could care less about the ethics of what was done, that shows blatant bias. If the election was influenced by the email release, the blame doesn't lie with who revealed the truth, the blame lies with the folks who acted in a way that would offend portion of the electorate. Don't blame the messenger.

"They thought she had a better chance".

So who cares if a majority of registered democrats wanted someone else? That's the difference between the 2 sides. No one in the GOP thought Trump had the best chance. That didn't motivate us to rig the primary against him. When the leaders of your side put their thumbs on the scales to get the candidate they want, regardless of what the citizens want, please tell me how that's different from fascism?

"They are not saying that so don't lie".

Hyperbole for laughs Paul. Is the media hellbent on connecting Trump to the Russians, despite the fact that there is zero evidence? How is that any different than Trump claiming that Obama wiretapped him, without evidence? Instead of taking my exaggeration literally, perhaps you could respond to the point that you well knew I was making?

The White House has tried to soothe an angry Britain after suggesting that President Barack Obama used London’s spy agency to conduct secret surveillance on President Trump while he was a candidate last year.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Theresa May said on Friday that “we’ve received assurances from the White House that these allegations would not be repeated.”

The GCHQ quickly and vehemently denied the contention in a rare statement issued by the spy agency on Thursday, calling the assertions “nonsense” and “utterly ridiculous.”

"And I remember all those post you praised Obama"

Now who is lying Paul? I consistently gave him credit for stabilizing the financial market. I consistently gave him credit for aggressiveky continuing th ehunt for Bin Laden.

And unlike what the media is doing to Trump (the anti Semite)...when I criticized Obama, I didn't routinely make up jibberish to criticize him. I didn't need to, he gave me a lifetime of honest, accurate ammunition to club him over the head with.

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;1118910
"They are not saying that so don't lie".

Hyperbole for laughs Paul. Is the media hellbent on connecting Trump to the Russians, despite the fact that there is zero evidence? How is that any different than Trump claiming that Obama wiretapped him, without evidence? Instead of taking my exaggeration literally, perhaps you could respond to the point that you well knew I was making?[/QUOTE]

There is a certain consistency in the big lie. If Trump is framed as a liar when he exaggerates, your hyperbole must also be called a lie. This is one of the many techniques that spymasters use. Also a technique of Alnskyites--i.e., current Democrats.

funny that when Clinton's/Obama's said things...on video...we were constantly told they didn't actually mean what they said...on video....repeatedly... if it came off in a bad light...and now...when someone tweets...which is the most difficult form of communication to judge tone and tenor....we're supposed to hold tweeters accountable for every word tweeted....

we appear to hold artful liars in much higher esteem than the bumbling variety....

you shouldn't put much stock in anything you read in tweets...particularly if the tweeter is orange and has funny hair :kewl:

funny that when Clinton's/Obama's said things...on video...we were constantly told they didn't actually mean what they said...on video....repeatedly... if it came off in a bad light...and now...when someone tweets...which is the most difficult form of communication to judge tone and tenor....we're supposed to hold tweeters accountable for every word tweeted....

we appear to hold artful liars in much higher esteem than the bumbling variety....

you shouldn't put much stock in anything you read in tweets...particularly if the tweeter is orange and has funny hair :kewl:

"when someone tweets...which is the most difficult form of communication to judge tone and tenor....we're supposed to hold tweeters accountable for every word tweeted"

Which is exactly why someone should tell Trump to back off.

I'll give him some benefit of the doubt on tone sometimes, for the reasons you stated. But when he flies off the handle that Obama personally went all Jack Bauer on him, snuck into Trump Tower like a ninja, and installed wiretaps...and there is zero evidence of that...then you can assign any tone you want to that, it makes Trump look ridiculous. If he wants to whine about being treated unfairly, he can make a compelling case (at least in regards to the media) without making stuff up. he has plenty of facts on his side.

it makes Trump look ridiculous.

maybe you have not noticed but this appears to be his recipe for success and for frustrating his detractors :D

"Nothing they (the media) did was illegal".

There is an amazing tendency of liberals, when backed into a corner, of answering a question that bears no resemblance to what was asked. You don't think the RNC. had some of the same type of emails about Trump? Breitbart just leaked a tape of Ryan saying he won't support Trump so why wouldn't he had sent the same message in an email? What makes you think the Reps. during the primaries didn't favor someone else? I didn't ask if it was illegal. It was not illegal for CNN to get debate questions ahead of time to Hilary. But if when that story breaks, all you care about is how it broke, and you could care less about the ethics of what was done, that shows blatant bias. If the election was influenced by the email release, the blame doesn't lie with who revealed the truth, the blame lies with the folks who acted in a way that would offend portion of the electorate. Don't blame the messenger.So you are saying the Russians are blamless?

"They thought she had a better chance".

So who cares if a majority of registered democrats wanted someone else? That's the difference between the 2 sides. No one in the GOP thought Trump had the best chance. That didn't motivate us to rig the primary against him. You have no way of knowing - bc the Russians choose to hack the DNC and not the RNC. When the leaders of your side put their thumbs on the scales to get the candidate they want, regardless of what the citizens want, please tell me how that's different from fascism:rotf2:?

"They are not saying that so don't lie".
Hyperbole for laughs PaulOk I got it. When someone calls you out for a statement you come back and say it was sarcasm or hyperbole. Is the media hellbent on connecting Trump to the Russians, despite the fact that there is zero evidenceBc Trump's cabinet/advisors have had numerous contacts w/the Russians - including getting $ from them or surrogates. When asked, their answers have not fully answered the questions either. How is that any different than Trump claiming that Obama wiretapped him, without evidence? Instead of taking my exaggeration literally, perhaps you could respond to the point that you well knew I was making?

It is not an exaggeration. Look at everythng w/Flynn. Now he is an foreign agent of Turkey and had gotten $ when he was in Trump's cabinet.

You're telling me that if the situation was reversed, the Rep. wouldn't be all over this?

Part of the big lie is to establish an air of equivalency. If the other side would have done the same thing that we are doing, then we are absolved. The only time when it was wrong was when they were, or would have been, doing it. We, of course, are blameless. We are merely doing what they did, or would have done. So it is perfectly right and good that we are now allowed, by precedent, or presupposed example of precedent, to carry on as we do. You cannot question our integrity in doing what you would have done. And you would not have been right in doing it if you had done it, because you have bad intentions.

maybe you have not noticed but this appears to be his recipe for success and for frustrating his detractors :D

I have noticed. But what gives him high ratings as host of 'The Apprentice', isn't translating into approval ratings as POTUS. And the stakes are a wee bit higher in his role as POTUS. He wasn't the leader of the free world as the host of 'The Apprentice', he was essentially a clown.

It is not an exaggeration. Look at everythng w/Flynn. Now he is an foreign agent of Turkey and had gotten $ when he was in Trump's cabinet.

You're telling me that if the situation was reversed, the Rep. wouldn't be all over this?

"Look at everythng w/Flynn. Now he is an foreign agent of Turkey and had gotten $ when he was in Trump's cabinet. "

And Flynn is also a liar. But we don't know what he discussed with the Russian ambassador, so we can't pretend to know they discussed collusion or influencing the election.

"You're telling me that if the situation was reversed, the Rep. wouldn't be all over this"

I'd be reacting to what I know, sure. I am not in the habit of putting on a tin-foil hat and pontificating wildly about crazy conspiracies. I don't claim that Obama was involved in faking the moon landing. But I think he was a racist who hated the traditional, Judeo-Christian, view of America. I can back that up all day long with irrefutable facts that support my conclusion.

Because the MSNBC release of his tax return actually made Trump look good, Maddow spent 10 minutes speculating that Trump only paid his taxes that one year, and only because Melania was applying for an updated immigration status, and Trump thought that would help if he paid his taxes for once. She had exactly zero evidence of this. Zip. But in her warped, frustrated mind, if he paid his taxes, there has to be a sinister reason behind it. She cannot accept that he might have paid what he owed simply because he had to, which is why everyone else pays their taxes. This is someone who calls herself a journalist, and hosts a prime time show on a network. And she is a lunatic. But considered mainstream within the liberal sphere.

But what gives him high ratings as host of 'The Apprentice', isn't translating into approval ratings as POTUS.



with the constant media and left barrage and his missteps or calculated landmines placed to cause reactions(no one seems to be able to figure out which) and the general divide in the country...I wouldn't anticipate he'll ever enjoy high approval ratings

It is not an exaggeration. Look at everythng w/Flynn. Now he is an foreign agent of Turkey and had gotten $ when he was in Trump's cabinet.

You're telling me that if the situation was reversed, the Rep. wouldn't be all over this?

"Breitbart just leaked a tape of Ryan saying he won't support Trump so why wouldn't he had sent the same message in an email?"

The DNC took active steps to rig the primary. Not remotely the same thing as Ryan saying he doesn't support the guy.

"So you are saying the Russians are blameless?"

Again, you are unable to respond to the question that was asked. Here is what I said at 10:20 in this thread, an exact quote...

"Yes, the hacking was wrong and should be investigated"

From that, you infer that I hold the Russians "blameless". That's easier for you to claim (despite the fact that I explicitly said the opposite of what you claim I am saying), than it is for you to admit that I am obviously right, when I say that the majority of the blame lies with the people whose unethical actions were brought to light. If you are pissed that the email leak influenced the election, you should be pissed at the DNC and Hilary for doing things that offended the voters.

When Woodward and Bernstein broke the Watergate story, Americans didn't blame 'Deep Throat' (their informant) for revealing things, and ignore Nixon's actions, for God's sake They blamed Nixon, and they were right to do so. Your party has come a long way since then, in terms of determining responsibility. And I don't see it as progress.

"You have no way of knowing (that the RNC didn't tip scales for Trump).

I know this - we don't use 'superdelegates' whose sole purpose, is to make sure that the RNC always gets the candidate they want, despite the will of the voters.

I also know this...the DNC's actions weren't going to be revealed until the Russians did it, because the American media isn't interested in digging up dirt on Democrats. The media, with the exception of Foxnews, doesn't even ask tough questions to liberals.

You are suggesting that the RNC was rigging the election for Trump? Please explain all of the powerful conservatives who spoke against him, and who actively campaigned for any of the other candidates.

with the constant media and left barrage and his missteps or calculated landmines placed to cause reactions(no one seems to be able to figure out which) and the general divide in the country...I wouldn't anticipate he'll ever enjoy high approval ratings

Scott, I am not influenced by the media's pathetic and "sour grapes" attempt to portray Trump as a cross between Adolf Hitler and Darth Vader. But I really dislike the guy. I dislike him, because of the things he actually does. Not what NBC says he does.

Sure, many people's opinions will be shaped by the media narrative. But if you take the media out of it, his behavior often leaves me shaking my head, wondering how anyone can possibly act that way.

[QUOTE=Jim in CT;11

behavior often leaves me shaking my head, wondering how anyone can possibly act that way.[/QUOTE]

I feel this way about most of the actors in a Washington...it's like sitting back and watching a good food fight

"Look at everythng w/Flynn. Now he is an foreign agent of Turkey and had gotten $ when he was in Trump's cabinet. "

And Flynn is also a liar. But we don't know what he discussed with the Russian ambassador, so we can't pretend to know they discussed collusion or influencing the election.No, we don't and that is why they are investigating.

"You're telling me that if the situation was reversed, the Rep. wouldn't be all over this"

I'd be reacting to what I know, sure. I am not in the habit of putting on a tin-foil hat and pontificating wildly about crazy conspiracies. I don't claim that Obama was involved in faking the moon landing. But I think he was a racist who hated the traditional, Judeo-Christian, view of America. I can back that up all day long with irrefutable facts that support my conclusion.

Because the MSNBC release of his tax return actually made Trump look good, Maddow spent 10 minutes speculating that Trump only paid his taxes that one year, and only because Melania was applying for an updated immigration status, and Trump thought that would help if he paid his taxes for once. She had exactly zero evidence of this. Zip. But in her warped, frustrated mind, if he paid his taxes, there has to be a sinister reason behind it. She cannot accept that he might have paid what he owed simply because he had to, which is why everyone else pays their taxes. This is someone who calls herself a journalist, and hosts a prime time show on a network. And she is a lunatic. But considered mainstream within the liberal sphere.

She is not considered mainstream. She is no better than Hannity or a host of the political entertainment division of Fox. Trump seems to say whatever Hannity said the day before (w/o confirming it). In fact, Hannity is prob. considered a moderate to the others Trump seems to follow.

Down goes Flynn! Down goes Maddow! Next . . . .

Trump is moving to control the media even further then he has already, cherry picking who is allowed in or allowed to accompany Tillerson; it will be Trumps way or the highway and the battle continues.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

President Donald Trump has stood by claims he was wiretapped under Barack Obama, telling visiting German Chancellor Angela Merkel: "At least we have something in common, perhaps."

If Trump was any colder towards her, she would have needed a parker, hat and some gloves to keep from freezing to death. Then to refuse the handshake and scowl and look like she's not even there, really POTUS; at least give us the appearance your presidential. At times he treats our allies as poorly as he treats the media and I'm not sure 4 years is long enough for a lot of leaders (except for Putin) to forget the nasty rhetoric coming from his mouth all throughout the campaign.

You two would rather someone phony and you're just not used to someone who speaks and shows how he believes . Merkel Is a horrible leader . Maybe you would feel better if he just kissed everyone's ass and hope they like him / us and then the world will be good . 👎
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You two would rather someone phony and you're just not used to someone who speaks and shows how he believes . Merkel Is a horrible leader . Maybe you would feel better if he just kissed everyone's ass and hope they like him / us and then the world will be good . 👎
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yeah...hugging dictators and dissing our friends was a good thing, brilliant in fact, for the last 8 years :rotflmao:

You don't need to like someone to show them some respect, if you feel that strongly why invite them to begin with or stage the media show to show us your Trumpness. I don't like Trump, but I'd show the man respect by extending my hand, taking the high road would have been better IMHO.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:huh:

You two would rather someone phony and you're just not used to someone who speaks and shows how he believes . Merkel Is a horrible leader . Maybe you would feel better if he just kissed everyone's ass and hope they like him / us and then the world will be good . 👎
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman your idea of a stand up guy is very sad indeed

Being an ass doesn't equal Strength.. it usually just the opposite Weak unsecure people Talk #^&#^&#^&#^&.. confident people have a no need to be an ass

Buckman your idea of a stand up guy is very sad indeed

Being an ass doesn't equal Strength.. it usually just the opposite Weak unsecure people Talk #^&#^&#^&#^&.. confident people have a no need to be an ass

You are decribing Obama
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well if today goes as most think it will, there should be a very large twitter storm tomorrow, because regardless of what Comey testifies to today, Trump never apologizes and is never wrong.

Well if today goes as most think it will, there should be a very large twitter storm tomorrow, because regardless of what Comey testifies to today, Trump never apologizes and is never wrong.

I have to agree .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well if today goes as most think it will, there should be a very large twitter storm tomorrow, because regardless of what Comey testifies to today, Trump never apologizes and is never wrong.

during*

Pro Russian Elephants trumpet in the new age, and the 62.8 million Americans who back it: that's a good headline.

answering the thread, two false claims fall into the hands of the world, including the American public, on wire taps. Can trump supporters claim anything the "president" says to be true? I would like to say he's out of tweets, but next I'm sure he'll say that Harambe is still alive. That Gorilla is already more important than the POTUS. I'm disgusted as a descendent of wwII combatants, to listen to much of the discussions on here. I liked Bush Sr., I didn't like Clinton at all because he gutted our defense, Bush Jr. got us in an unwinnable war, Obama actually took out the key guy, but kept us in the same Bush war. Now, the new claim is to take on the world? I think Trump is doing a good job at that. I also think we are losing, unless we are going towards WW3. If that is the case, anyone 34 and under should enlist in the Navy, anyone interested in the marines 28, and the rest of us 42 and under should enlist in the army. Do it. don't talk back,,, just support your country in the way you want it to be. Lots of talk here no action.

If you are over 42 shut the #^&#^&#^&#^& up

if youre looking for a draft.. a younger person will be in command.

Interesting that Comey admitted the FBI is investigating if there were ties between the Russians and the Trump campaign (God I hope none, how would they clear that up if both Trump and Pence were involved?). But he would not say if they were investigating to find out who leaked the fact the Mike Flynn was recorded talking with the Russian ambassador. Whoever leaked that to the press, I believe committed an obvious crime.

All I am saying is the talk today could mean my kids could go into war. Myself, could go into war, and they (us gov) will not pick you. They will choose me, they will choose my children ... or in this case (he's 2 ) will choose him in the future. I will teach him respect for guns and how to fire them. I will teach him how to be accurate, quiet, and how to be undetectable in his approach. I lost my baseball coach in the 911 attack, my father lost a hunting partner, after the sandy hook ordeal, I am fully aware of that attack, everything else since then seems to be unrelated. Every Democrat including those in my state of CT seems to state the same on the school attacks, I personally know Mrs. Murphy who was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. I personally know her husband because he was my father's hunting partner and he believes the progression of gun laws is wrong. Can he talk about that? no, no, no, and he shouldn't be able to. He is still strong on gun rights, despite all the Murphy / Bluementhal talk.

Who is over 42 in this discussion?

All I am saying is the talk today could mean my kids could go into war. Myself, could go into war, and they (us gov) will not pick you. They will choose me, they will choose my children ... or in this case (he's 2 ) will choose him in the future. I will teach him respect for guns and how to fire them. I will teach him how to be accurate, quiet, and how to be undetectable in his approach. I lost my baseball coach in the 911 attack, my father lost a hunting partner, after the sandy hook ordeal, I am fully aware of that attack, everything else since then seems to be unrelated. Every Democrat including those in my state of CT seems to state the same on the school attacks, I personally know Mrs. Murphy who was killed in the Sandy Hook shooting. I personally know her husband because he was my father's hunting partner and he believes the progression of gun laws is wrong. Can he talk about that? no, no, no, and he shouldn't be able to. He is still strong on gun rights, despite all the Murphy / Bluementhal talk.

"could mean my kids could go into war. Myself, could go into war"

Against Russia? Or ISIS? The world is a very, very unstable place, no doubt. North Korea is led by an absolute maniac, who is doing everything he can to get nukes.

"Can he talk about that? no, no, no, and he shouldn't be able to."

Why shouldn't he be able to talk about something?

Who is over 42 in this discussion?

I'm well north of that .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you are over 42 shut the #^&#^&#^&#^& up

JohnR grandfathered me in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am 50 did my time in Iraq and my son is currently active duty in the Air Force C-17 loadmaster .. my distain for Trump has nothing to do with his adopted R next to his name He is dangerous most of his appointments are dangerous... and your right most over 42 wont be affected directly by his policy's or lack of them he will leave do nothing for the Avg worker and his SS supporters dont care they have theirs ..

So sit back and watch the show until we can distract ourselves with long nights or earlier mornings and debate eels or plugs or chunk:buds:

VDH.....timely

Monasteries of the Mind

"When everything is politicized, people retreat into mental mountaintops — dreams of the past and fantasies of the future.

The rapper Snoop Dogg released a video shooting a mock-up of the president. Rapper Bow Wow wants to “pimp” the first lady. What a difference a few months make. Not long ago rapper Kendrick Lamar issued an album whose cover showed young rappers on the White House lawn celebrating the death of a white judge. He received an invitation to the White House (a cut from his To Pimp a Butterfly album was Barack Obama’s favorite song of the year). When Trump has lost the rapper vote, has he lost America?

There is now something called the “Resistance,” which by its nomenclature poses that its opposition to Trump is reminiscent of European partisan resistance to Hitler: Affluent progressives are now on the barricades to stop another Holocaust? Cities now nullify federal law in the spirit of the Old Confederacy. A federal judge doesn’t enforce federal law because he says he does not like what the president and his associates said in the past, during the campaign. Op-ed writers overseas wait eagerly for the president’s assassination. At CNN, Fareed Zakaria, wrist-slapped for past plagiarism, melts down while screaming of Trump’s “bullsh**.” Madonna says she has “thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.” All the insanity reminds one of the old Kingston Trio ballad:

They’re rioting in Africa, they’re starving in Spain.
There’s hurricanes in Florida, and Texas needs rain.
The whole world is festering with unhappy souls.
The French hate the Germans, the Germans hate the Poles.
Italians hate Yugoslavs, South Africans hate the Dutch.
And I don’t like anybody very much!

Bad filibusters are now good ones. Vowing to kill, hurt, or remove the president and first family is hip, when it used to be felonious. States’ rights and nullification are now Confederate-cool. Free speech is hate speech. Censorship is a mere trigger warning. Assimilation is cultural appropriation. The nasal voiced thirtysomethings on the news, in their retro outfits of high-water pants and horn-rimmed glasses, impart worldly wisdom as our new Eric Sevareids.

When we all wish to be victims, there are too few oppressors to go around. Or perhaps the Boomer generation is going out in a fit of frenzied self-recognition: It enjoyed all that was given to it, did not accomplish much itself, and left a mess to its successors. Its metaphor is California’s Oroville dam: Aging greens believe that it never should have been built; but since it was, it came in handy for the good life; but no one should spend any money on its repair; but when it nearly fails, we were all warned that it was never a good idea. And so no more dams will be built for our children.

An increasing number of American don’t take all this seriously. And that’s not new."

If you are over 42 shut the #^&#^&#^&#^& up

Right, because us "Over 42's" never served our country....

I'll just rip up my DD214 and pretend it never happened... :rolleyes:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am 50 did my time in Iraq and my son is currently active duty in the Air Force C-17 loadmaster .. my distain for Trump has nothing to do with his adopted R next to his name He is dangerous most of his appointments are dangerous... and your right most over 42 wont be affected directly by his policy's or lack of them he will leave do nothing for the Avg worker and his SS supporters dont care they have theirs ..

So sit back and watch the show until we can distract ourselves with long nights or earlier mornings and debate eels or plugs or chunk:buds:

I thought you said that you didn't subscribe to the Chicken Little point of view. Maybe I misunderstood.

I am 50 did my time in Iraq and my son is currently active duty in the Air Force C-17 loadmaster .. my distain for Trump has nothing to do with his adopted R next to his name He is dangerous most of his appointments are dangerous... and your right most over 42 wont be affected directly by his policy's or lack of them he will leave do nothing for the Avg worker and his SS supporters dont care they have theirs ..

So sit back and watch the show until we can distract ourselves with long nights or earlier mornings and debate eels or plugs or chunk:buds:

"he will leave do nothing for the Avg worker "

Sigh. Tell that to the people getting up in Indiana, and going to work at there jobs at the Carrier plant.

He has also repeatedly said that he wants to increase tax credits for childcare expenses for families who work, and to offer tax credits for families where one parent stays home, so that more people can make that choice. He wants to implement paid family medical leave for God's sake. And he is talking about tax reform.

Now, he hasn't done those things yet. Give him some time.

IF he gets those things implemented (and that's still an "if" at this point, but there is evidence to suggest that he intends to keep promises), he will have done plenty for the little guy.

There are reasons to be genuinely concerned about this guy. Saying he won't do anything for the average Joe, is not supported by the facts. I'm sure that's what they say wherever you get your news, but it's simply not true.

"his SS supporters dont care they have theirs .."

Is that a Nazi reference? Or Social Security?

So you don't support him? Boy, from 2009 - 2016, the places where you get your news, said that those who didn't support the President at that time, were racist. How things change.

I have no problem with saying you don't support the President, I hated just about everything that Obama represented.

"he will leave do nothing for the Avg worker "

Sigh. Tell that to the people getting up in Indiana, and going to work at there jobs at the Carrier plant. how did i guess you would bring that up again seems you have no concern bout the 2500 getting let go by the state department

He has also repeatedly said that he wants to increase tax credits for childcare expenses for families who work, and to offer tax credits for families where one parent stays home, so that more people can make that choice. He wants to implement paid family medical leave for God's sake. And he is talking about tax reform.

Now, he hasn't done those things yet. Give him some time.

IF he gets those things implemented (and that's still an "if" at this point, but there is evidence to suggest that he intends to keep promises), he will have done plenty for the little guy.

There are reasons to be genuinely concerned about this guy. Saying he won't do anything for the average Joe, is not supported by the facts. I'm sure that's what they say wherever you get your news, but it's simply not true.

"his SS supporters dont care they have theirs .."

Is that a Nazi reference? Or Social Security? the latter

So you don't support him? Boy, from 2009 - 2016, the places where you get your news, said that those who didn't support the President at that time, were racist. How things change. because it was True being black was all it took for some not to support him Trumps Lack of support is a direct result of Trump no one else

I have no problem with saying you don't support the President, I hated just about everything that Obama represented.did he leave the country better than he found it ?? will Trump??

keep waving those pom poms ... saved 700 created - 2500 he's 1800 in the hole

Wife company
Genesis Health Care Corporation just took away 4 paid holidays took away double time 1\2 if they work a holiday .. and reduced sick time she's had for the past 18 years.. and the economy the best its been in years coincidence doubtful I call it the Trump effect

keep waving those pom poms ... saved 700 created - 2500 he's 1800 in the hole

Wife company
Genesis Health Care Corporation just took away 4 paid holidays took away double time 1\2 if they work a holiday .. and reduced sick time she's had for the past 18 years.. and the economy the best its been in years coincidence doubtful I call it the Trump effect

"how did i guess you would bring that up again "

Because even you knew that your argument was demonstrably false.

"you have no concern bout the 2500 getting let go by the state department"

Of course I do. But if the State Dept can do the same job without those 2,500 people, then they should be let go. The federal government is not a jobs program. It should be as lean as possible. Do you want your taxes to be higher than necessary? In fact, if those people are not necessary, then letting them go is yet another thing Trump is doing for the average Joe, because it will lower his tax burden. You are making my case for me. But you are in a public union, so I get why you like the idea of government spending more than it needs to, because excessive spending goes into your pocket. So it's you who has no concern for the average Joe, because there is no tax hike you won't support, because the more money confiscated from your neighbors, the more money ends up in your pocket.

"because it (accusing Obama opponents of racism) was True"

Go ahead and try to prove that. Take all the time in the world. Why can't I say that all those blacks that voted for Obama instead of McCain and Romney, are racist?

"Trumps Lack of support is a direct result of Trump no one else "

Right, right. Opposition to Obama is inherently racist, but opposition to Trump is justified. You get to declare that with no evidence whatsoever. Very convenient for you

WDMSO, why does the GOP control both houses of Congress, and a huge majority of state governorships and state legislatures? Racism? Is it because of racism?

"did he (Obama)leave the country better than he found it ??"

That can't be proven one way or the other. The stock market was obviously higher when he left, and the economy was more stable. But before the 2016 election, after 8 years of Obama, a large majority of Americans thought we were heading in the wrong direction. That means something.

Here's the best answer to your question, WDMSO...if Obama's policies improved the nation, then please explain why, after 8 years of Obama, the democratic party holds fewer federal and state elected offices, than any time since the Civil War?

My answer: the American public likes Obama personally, they think he is a good guy. But they don't like his policies. It's not racism, or his approval ratings wouldn't be high. But they reject his policies.

Buckman, I feel like you have served this country. I'm not certain but thank you if you have.
Paul S you look like a young Robert Redford I hope the others will protect you.
Wdmso, thank you sincerely for your service and your son's current service. My thoughts are wholeheartedly with you and your son.
Wilson, you quoted Snoop? Gressak says hi, we need a proper intro on some fishy water this year. You are crossing too many paths with me.
TheDadFisherman thank you for your service!

Jim in CT, you are a strange one. Stop it with the carrier deal it wasn't trump. It was only Pence, who could legally handle that unless you're implicating the president on illegal actions? Next thing you'll want is a bailout of the auto industry.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman, I feel like you have served this country. I'm not certain but thank you if you have.
Paul S you look like a young Robert Redford I hope the others will protect you.
Wdmso, thank you sincerely for your service and your son's current service. My thoughts are wholeheartedly with you and your son.
Wilson, you quoted Snoop? Gressak says hi, we need a proper intro on some fishy water this year. You are crossing too many paths with me.
TheDadFisherman thank you for your service!

Jim in CT, you are a strange one. Stop it with the carrier deal it wasn't trump. It was only Pence, who could legally handle that unless you're implicating the president on illegal actions? Next thing you'll want is a bailout of the auto industry.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My heart and sole are with the men and women that serve or have served this nation . No , I haven't served my self, but my better halve has 2 marines and a 3rd boy in the Air Force . I watch how much she misses and worries about them . The sacrifice that military families make deserves our outmost respect .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Paul S you look like a young Robert Redford I think it my luxurious hair.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

FYI - I belive Jim also served.

My heart and sole are with the men and women that serve or have served this nation . The sacrifice that military families make deserves our outmost respect .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:cheers:

I belive Jim also served

Well then thank you Jim
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"There are reasons to be genuinely concerned about this guy. Saying he won't do anything for the average Joe, is not supported by the facts. I'm sure that's what they say wherever you get your news, but it's simply not true."

Actually, the fact that he's going to do anything for "the little guy" has yet to be supported by facts... Again, the carrier thing saved jobs but it happened before he was president, and was a politically charged, self serving move to get publicity he could ride into the White House. He needs more "Carrier" moments now that he's President to prove he cares, not more moments where he shows up at a campaign rally spreading false claims of being wiretapped.

He's not in this for the little guy or the big guy, he's in it for himself.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Buckman, I feel like you have served this country. I'm not certain but thank you if you have.
Paul S you look like a young Robert Redford I hope the others will protect you.
Wdmso, thank you sincerely for your service and your son's current service. My thoughts are wholeheartedly with you and your son.
Wilson, you quoted Snoop? Gressak says hi, we need a proper intro on some fishy water this year. You are crossing too many paths with me.
TheDadFisherman thank you for your service!

Jim in CT, you are a strange one. Stop it with the carrier deal it wasn't trump. It was only Pence, who could legally handle that unless you're implicating the president on illegal actions? Next thing you'll want is a bailout of the auto industry.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Jim in CT, you are a strange thoughtful one"

Fixed it for you.

"It was only Pence"

Wrong. Of course Pence had a large role. But Trump reminded Carrier's parent company, that they depend a lot on federal spending (they are a defense contractor). Pence partnered with Trump to pull it off. Could Pence have done it without Trump? Probably. But the irrefutable fact is, Trump made a point to promise to save those jobs, then Obama mocked him and said it wasn't possible to save those jobs, and Trump proved him wrong.

What is "strange" to me, is that people like you deny historical facts about what happened, to serve your personal agenda. I give people credit for the good they do, and criticism when they screw up, I'm not a blind party hack. If that's strange to you, maybe that says more about you than it does about me.

"Next thing you'll want is a bailout of the auto industry....."

Yeah you've got me pegged all right.

"There are reasons to be genuinely concerned about this guy. Saying he won't do anything for the average Joe, is not supported by the facts. I'm sure that's what they say wherever you get your news, but it's simply not true."

Actually, the fact that he's going to do anything for "the little guy" has yet to be supported by facts... Again, the carrier thing saved jobs but it happened before he was president, and was a politically charged, self serving move to get publicity he could ride into the White House. He needs more "Carrier" moments now that he's President to prove he cares, not more moments where he shows up at a campaign rally spreading false claims of being wiretapped.

He's not in this for the little guy or the big guy, he's in it for himself.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Again, the carrier thing saved jobs but it happened before he was president, and was a politically charged, self serving move "

Did it help the people whose jobs were saved, or not? I can not know what his motives were for helping save those jobs, neither can you. Maybe he did it to give the finger to Obama, maybe he wanted to help those people. I don't know, and neither do you. But the Messiah Obama specifically said those Carrier jobs could not be saved, and Trump/Pence did it in no time.

Who gives a sh*t that it happened before the inauguration? The Hollywood Access tape also happened "before he was President", so should that have been ignored?

"He needs more "Carrier" moments now that he's President to prove he cares,"

Agreed. He is talking about tax reform, he is talking about all kinds of tax credits to help working families save on childcare expenses, he is talking about paid family medical leave. If he fails to do those things, I'll be the very first person to say he lied. If he accomplishes those things, will you give him credit.

Before the election, there are a lot of stories about Trump quietly being very, very generous to those in need. Does that wipe out all the awful things he has done? No. But you can't focus on the bad, and ignore the good. He is the sum of everything he does. But on every single TV station except one, all you hear is the bad. Never anything good. And I don't like the guy, I think he's a boorish, offensive, egomaniac. But he has done some wonderful things.

There was a very sick Jewish boy, in California I think, needed to fly across the country with all his medical equipment. Commercial airlines could not accommodate him. Trump sent his jet immediately. How does the media thanks him? By calling him an anti-Semite. Try telling the family of the sick little Jewish boy that Trump is an anti-Semite. Tell that to his daughter Ivanka, who he clearly adores (to the point of being creepy actually), and she is a Jew.

"he's in it for himself"

Obama wasn't? In terms of politics and policy, Obama was almost no different from Hilary. Why didn't he step aside and give her the nomination in 2008? Because HE wanted to be POTUS. Not because he had better ideas than she did.

There was a very sick Jewish boy, in California I think, needed to fly across the country with all his medical equipment. Commercial airlines could not accommodate him. Trump sent his jet immediately. How does the media thanks him? By calling him an anti-Semite. Try telling the family of the sick little Jewish boy that Trump is an anti-Semite. .

That happened in 1988. Ian probably wasn't even born then.

Pres. Trump is notoriously cheap. He was never active in the NY fund raising circuit and even got in trouble for paying a business fine with $ from his foundation. He also used $ from the foundation to buy personal items. I hate to criticize someone for the amount of $ they give but i'm offering a counterpoint.

That happened in 1988. Ian probably wasn't even born then.

Pres. Trump is notoriously cheap. He was never active in the NY fund raising circuit and even got in trouble for paying a business fine with $ from his foundation. He also used $ from the foundation to buy personal items. I hate to criticize someone for the amount of $ they give but i'm offering a counterpoint.

And there are people who say he's exceedingly generous.

Paul, he's not a good guy. He's not even close to being what I (nor you, probably) would call a good guy. Your counterpoint is 100% valid. 100%. But it's not all there is to him, that's all I'm saying. We should be able to say "yes, he is very obnoxious", but we should also be able to say "he saved those Carrier jobs when Obama said explicitly, that it couldn't be done. Maybe there is a lesson to be learned there, because he did, quite easily, that which Obama said was impossible."

One host at Foxnews (Hannity) never says anything critical about Trump. No one else on TV, from what I can tell, will ever give him credit for the good things he does.

Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy were also scumbags, the absolute filth at the bottom of the barrel. But they are praised by the same folks who bash Trump. The hypocrisy is stunning.

Bill Clinton proved, I think, that a reptile can be a productive President.

Actually, the fact that he's going to do anything for "the little guy" has yet to be supported by facts...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, he did sign an Executive order to assist historically black colleges and universities procure $26B in funding. He also signed 2 bills that were going to help create jobs in the STEM fields for women, being that my daughter is currently studying for a degree in a STEM field, that is pretty significant from my point of view.

Not bad for a Misogynistic Racist.....

I'm in the same camp as Jim on the guy...I think he's a class "A" A$$, but you can't just ignore the good things he does and only focus on the bad....

Well, he did sign an Executive order to assist historically black colleges and universities procure $26B in funding. He also signed 2 bills that were going to help create jobs in the STEM fields for women, being that my daughter is currently studying for a degree in a STEM field, that is pretty significant from my point of view.

Not bad for a Misogynistic Racist.....

I'm in the same camp as Jim on the guy...I think he's a class "A" A$$, but you can't just ignore the good things he does and only focus on the bad....

"being that my daughter is currently studying for a degree in a STEM field, that is pretty significant from my point of view."

And I have 3 boys, but still feel that is significant, as well as noble, hopefully good public policy.

"you can't just ignore the good things he does and only focus on the bad"

The refusal of many (not all) to concede anything good about this guy...is like nothing I have ever seen. They even make up criticisms (saying he's an anti-Semite, which will come as news to Ivanka who is Jewish). The left is on a mission. They are putting ALL of their eggs in the "destroy Trump" basket. It could work like a charm for them. But if he implements some populist things that really resonate with folks, it could blow up in their faces.

The 2018 midterms will be fascinating. If you look at who is up for re-election in the Senate, it could not be worse for Democrats. Twice as any Dems up for re-election compared to the GOP, and many of the Dems are in purple states that went for Trump.

That happened in 1988. Ian probably wasn't even born then.

Pres. Trump is notoriously cheap. He was never active in the NY fund raising circuit and even got in trouble for paying a business fine with $ from his foundation. He also used $ from the foundation to buy personal items. I hate to criticize someone for the amount of $ they give but i'm offering a counterpoint.

Close... very very close....