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

[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?

moving those goal posts around again:confused:

[QUOTE=PaulS;1118183]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's always saying funny stuff

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?

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

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.