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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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:

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.

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?

reminded me of this

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

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...wiretap-claims

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

Edward Snowden: Leaks that exposed US spy programme
 

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

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

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

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?

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.”

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:

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 ??

you really need to switch to decaf :uhuh:

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

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.

me either :huh:

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

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

then you should use "quotes"...

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.