Jump to content

Minor Politics & News


Dad

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

EdSec wants to keep trans bathroom law, Ag does not. Admin pulling law

 

A bit surprised that DeVos and Sessions disagreed on that, but not surprised that Trump is putting his foot down and taking away transgender rights.

 

In other news, I don't think it's come up yet, but Alex Jones is taking on the role of Trump's information source and validator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit surprised that DeVos and Sessions disagreed on that, but not surprised that Trump is putting his foot down and taking away transgender rights.

 

In other news, I don't think it's come up yet, but Alex Jones is taking on the role of Trump's information source and validator.

It's a good thing he's separating his personal views from the law

 

People can piss wherever they want in Trump tower, but this should be a local issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're not answering the question.  The server is irrelevant.  Oh, and if it was there, it means he did something wrong.  So I dunno where you're going with this.

I get that the second FISA warrant was authorized, but it was not authorized to go after Trump. And sure hell not authorized to WT Trump Tower

 


 

Server was debunked later on. That's not how our country works

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why I Take Trump’s Claims of Wiretapping Seriously: All you bright bulbs say that Trump’s claim that Obama tapped his phone is “baseless. He got the idea, you snicker, from an old Breitbart article—or from talk radio. Ha ha ha ha! I really do wish Trump hadn’t used a tweet storm to make his accusation. It's grave & deserves a more solemn & judicious presentation. And I don’t know whether he'll succeed in backing it up. But I bet he does, at least so as to win the political argument—and here’s why. You bright bulbs point to Clapper’s statement (http://cnn.it/2lOHFWo ) and coo, “No wiretapping of Trump took place!” This, however, is an overly literal interpretation of “wiretapping Trump.” The BBC reports that on 15 Oct a FISA court approved an investigation focusing on 3 Trump associates: Let’s speculate that this investigation allowed the NSA to monitor all calls of all 3 individuals. This allows us to build a scenario in which both Trump’s harsh accusation & Clapper’s categorical denial are true. Who might the 3 under investigation be? Candidate #1 would be Roger Stone, Trump's informal political advisor: My 2nd candidate: Michael Cohen, Trump’s lawyer, who helped generate a pro-Russian peace plan for Ukraine. 3rd on my list: General Mike Flynn, who unwisely took money from the Russian government in 2015.

 

All 3 had some connection or another w/Russia, so a request for a national security wiretap on them is a plausible possibility. As a result, Trump’s calls w/his pol advisor, lawyer, & Natsec advisor would be monitored. That's many calls covering a lot of ground! Yet Clapper's denial stands, b/c Trump's phone wasn't explicitly targeted. He was just a dolphin "accidentally" caught in a tuna net. You bright bulbs'll stand your ground on the technical claim that Trump’s phone wasn’t tapped, but politically it's a losing argument. And you'll also say, "A cardinal rule of the Obama admin” was to leave FISA requests to the DOJ: Leave them to Loretta Lynch, you say? Someone about as divorced from politics as this video would suggest

 

It's easy to imagine Obama winking & nodding to Lynch, or sending a trusted friend to whisper a few thoughts in her ear. “You have no evidence to back up that scurrilous claim!” you will scream. To which I must confess, you’re absolutely right. I don’t. I’m totally speculating. Point to you! And while I’m in retreat, let me also concede that Lynch’s meeting w/Bill Clinton was accidental & innocuous.

 

But Trump still wins before the court of public opinion, b/c you just admitted 3 key things:

 

(A) That Loretta Lynch got the NSA to tap hours and hours of Trump’s calls.

 

(B) That she did so just 3 weeks before the election! And © That her “natsec investigation” turned up zero, zilch, nada & niente.

 

© But meanwhile, it "accidentally" generated copious leaks fueling the sinister accusation that Trump is Putin’s Manchurian candidate.

 

I predict that if a Lynch “investigation” anything like this scenario did in fact occur, fair-minded people will side with Trump.

 

Rachel Maddow will love your arguments, but they will only convince registered Dems, and not even all of them.

 

This scenario is speculative. We don't know the facts. They might yet prove you right. But the ground you're on is weaker than you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If all of this bullshit really goes back to the Russian non-sense, then the problem is everyone's.

Surely you have a more thought out response than the one you just provided?

 

The point isn't Russia or not. The courts refused to give a FISA warrant that target Trump, so the feds issued a second one that didn't name trump, and they still tapped him all the same. That's not legal, and now the people like Pres. Obama are shrugging and saying "I didn't know about it"

 

It's not bullshit, and it's a problem regardless of who is goes back to. Look at Craft's link, they can do exactly what they did to Trump to anyone they dislike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely you have a more thought out response than the one you just provided?

 

The point isn't Russia or not. The courts refused to give a FISA warrant that target Trump, so the feds issued a second one that didn't name trump, and they still tapped him all the same. That's not legal, and now the people like Pres. Obama are shrugging and saying "I didn't know about it"

 

It's not bullshit, and it's a problem regardless of who is goes back to. Look at Craft's link, they can do exactly what they did to Trump to anyone they dislike

 

If it's due to Russia, then yes, Russia is the point.  If they are the reason he was tapped, it has everything to do with them.  They way they went about it is illegal, and now they can't pin anything on Drumpf because they were sloppy.  So yeah, it's bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's due to Russia, then yes, Russia is the point.  If they are the reason he was tapped, it has everything to do with them.  They way they went about it is illegal, and now they can't pin anything on Drumpf because they were sloppy.  So yeah, it's bullshit.

Since when did you become childish enough to start with the "Drumpf" stuff? Is that just an edgy new trend.

 

The entire problem here is you cannot beg the conviction.

 

Guilty until Guilty does not play in America...they also haven't found anything. Would you be ok with the Feds tapping you on innuendo then leaking it to your political opponent? Cause Hillary wall all about that secret server in Trump Tower (which turned out to be nothing)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when did you become childish enough to start with the "Drumpf" stuff? Is that just an edgy new trend.

 

The entire problem here is you cannot beg the conviction.

 

Guilty until Guilty does not play in America...they also haven't found anything. Would you be ok with the Feds tapping you on innuendo then leaking it to your political opponent? Cause Hillary wall all about that secret server in Trump Tower (which turned out to be nothing)

 

I was agreeing with you.  Read it again.  Or are you just purposely misconstruing my words so that you can have some kind of argument?  That's not how debates work.

 

The Russia bullshit won't fly.  It's not even feasible.  And the Feds tapping into the Tower with no evidence proves a lot of people stepped out of line for some bogus allegations.  It was sloppy and stupid.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...