We need to talk about Donald – the Nightmare continues

[Brian Peacock]

If there was no collusion, then it is fake news. Democrats have been accusing Republicans of treason.

If there was no collusion, then it will have been fake news -- or at least erroneous or false conjecture -- but Trump and allies have been calling reporting of ties between Russian and Trump affiliates as FAKE NEWS, as well as the other things I mentioned, and the ties between members of Trump's team and foreign powers (not least his own financial ties) are a documented fact. A Dem congressman accused Trump of Treason -- a federal crime which I believe warrants the death penalty -- but resorting to that level of hyperbole, in an environment already over-saturated with hyperbole, does not mean very much nor that there should be no investigation into the depth or extent of Team Trump ties with Russian or the influence they might have had on US democratic processes.

[Forty Two]

If there was no collusion, then it is fake news. Democrats have been accusing Republicans of treason.

If there was no collusion, then it will have been fake news -- or at least erroneous or false conjecture --

Indeed, these are serious allegations to be based on "an unnamed source" and documents that have not been corroborated and which are supposedly reported upon to a reporter by a person who says he happened to see them. Note COMEY did not say he wrote what was reported. Someone else says they saw Comey's note. I wouldn't believe reports like that about Obama or Bush. There is too much room for political machinations, and neither side in this is beyond bullshitting to destroy their opponents. I'll believe it when the source comes forward or concrete evidence is obtained.

but Trump and allies have been calling reporting of ties between Russian and Trump affiliates as FAKE NEWS, as well as the other things I mentioned, and the ties between members of Trump's team and foreign powers (not least his own financial ties) are a documented fact.

Except, that they are not a documented fact. What "ties?" To whom? It's not illegal to invest in Russia. Was there a tie between "the Trump Team" and the Russian government? If you're aware of it, you better report it to the CIA and the Senate foreign relations committee - because they don't know about those ties.

But, be specific -- what's Trump's (a) tie to a foreign power, or (b) financial ties to a foreign power? If it's a documented fact, link to the source.

A Dem congressman accused Trump of Treason -- a federal crime which I believe warrants the death penalty -- but resorting to that level of hyperbole, in an environment already over-saturated with hyperbole, does not mean very much nor that there should be no investigation into the depth or extent of Team Trump ties with Russian or the influence they might have had on US democratic processes.

Sure, it's as much bullshit as saying someone is an "enemy of the people."

Depth or extent? What' one "trump team tie with Russia?"

There are always investigations going about Russian's influence on the US processes. This is not new or news. The published intelligence report that was 25 pages long with 1/2 a page dedicated to vague nothings about supposed "hacking" (which proved or contained proof of exactly nothing) -- that published intelligence report simply confirmed that Russia was still engaged in its decades old practice of fucking with us. Almost everything in the intelligence report that we saw was stuff gleaned from public sources.

This is, really, 98% horseshit, and 2% speculation.

[Brian Peacock]

Your every use of an interrogative above suggests another good reason for an independent investigation of this matter. Can you tell us why you appear so resistant to that idea both in principle and in practice?

[Forty Two]

Your every use of an interrogative above suggests another good reason for an independent investigation of this matter. Can you tell us why you appeal so resistant to that idea both in principle and in practice?

Because it's the same argument the birthers and such made about the allegations against Obama and his eligibility to be elected President. What would have been wrong with an "investigation" and a special prosecutor then? Easy - there was no good reason offered - no probable cause affidavit, for example, or equivalent - to support such a monumental inquiry. Just because people start reporting on some "unnamed official" who may not even have first hand knowledge of a topic, doesn't mean there is a reason for a massive inquiry.

I wouldn't support a waste of time against Obama, and I don't support it now.

[Brian Peacock]

So there's literally no reason for concern?

[Animavore]

[Tero]

The bitch is right, for once
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/05/22/a ... mpeachment

[L'Emmerdeur]

Flynn is invoking the 5th in response to a Senate request for documents relating to his interactions with Russian officials.

"Flynn Takes The 5th, Refuses To Turn Over Documents To Senate Panel"

Regarding the Senate Intelligence Committee's document request, Flynn's attorney Robert Kelner said, "Producing documents that fall within the subpoena's broad scope would be a testimonial act, insofar as it would confirm or deny the existence of such documents."

The letter to committee chairmen also states that Flynn is "the target on nearly a daily basis of outrageous allegations, often attributed to anonymous sources in Congress or elsewhere in the United States Government, which, however fanciful on their face and unsubstantiated by evidence, feed the escalating public frenzy against him."

As of four days ago, it was reported that Il Douche was saying he wants Flynn back in the White House.

[Brian Peacock]

The "escalating public frenzy" could be significantly tempered by material evidence which would put the claim that Flynn's meetings with Russian operatives were 'commonplace' discussions beyond doubt.

[Hermit]

Things that right wing nut jobs are so good at ignoring - #291

[Hermit]

Trump confirms that he never did what nobody has accused him of.



Mother: "Why is your brother crying?"
Son: "I did not kick him in the nuts."

[Brian Peacock]

Things that right wing nut jobs are so good at ignoring - #291

Yeah, but Democrats...

[Forty Two]

So there's literally no reason for concern?

I'm just asking if there is probable cause.

There's an allegation going around that Seth Rich was murdered because he was (a) going to testify against Hillary Clinton, and (b) was the guy who leaked the DNC documents to Wikileaks. A witness has come forward claiming personal knowledge, Kim Dotcom of Megaupload.

Should there be an investigation? Should the FBI "Russia investigation" be expanded to include the Set Rich murder, and the "contacts" and "collusion" in the DNC regarding Seth Rich, and their possible involvement? If so, why? If not, why not?

Is there literally no reason for concern about that?

with regard to most of the allegations I've heard about Trump, yes there is literally no reason for concern, because there seems to be this hysterical drive to characterize everything as a criminal conspiracy. Trump officials contact Russian officials in the lead-up to Trump taking office? That's only a problem because it's Trump. The incoming administration ALWAYS has such contacts. The thing the media spins now is that the meetings and conversations were "secret" because nobody cleared the dates and times with the Washington Post and CNN beforehand, and nobody provided transcripts of the conversations, so we are told that we need to worry about what was said in these meetings.

Firing Comey -- that's a big scandal only because Trump did it. The Democrats were calling for Comey's head, and basically railing against Comey for not resigning. So, Trump fires him and now it's an impeachable offense? Come on.

If the prior President expressed "hope" that an investigation would be ended, nobody would bat an eye. It's because the reporters don't trust Trump that they think his motives are impure here and he must be "really" telling Comey to shut down the investigation. It doesn't matter that the investigation is still ongoing, and nothing has actually been shut down. The prior President declared his view of the Hillary investigation to be that Hillary was careless, but a great person doing a great job, and that she didn't intend to put any confidential info at risk or to disclose anything. And, what did Comey find? Hillary was careless, but there was no intent, soooo.. case closed, just as Obama opined it should be determined.... nobody batted an eye in the press. Why? Because we know Obama's motives are pure, and we know Trump's are impure.

There isn't a single thing Trump does that isn't criticized in the media as being done wrong. They wrote front page articles about how he eat his steak well-done with ketchup.



A CNN reporter broke the major story that Trump placed a soda can on his desk, which was completely unpresidential and had not been seen in previous administrations..... of course, photos popped up immediately showing Obama with coffee cups, feet and sodas on the desk, as well as other predecessor Presidents doing the same - but, to a CNN reporter, everything Trump does is wrong, so....Sodagate was born. http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-ov ... oke-2017-4 (it's also a problem for Trump to have a red button on his desk to summon a butler, even though it's the same red button that was on the desk last year....)


Does intelligence exist of collusion --- No --

Is there intelligence indicating collusion? -- no --

No evidence of collusion -

No evidence of collusion --

No evidence of wikileaks collusion with Russia -

Now, when people say things were done "without evidence" -- then what should we do with those statements?

[Tero]

Donald Trump’s Budget Will Never Pass. It’s Still Frightening.
None of this is especially surprising. Trump's budget director is Mick Mulvaney, a former Tea Party congressman from South Carolina who seems to largely have been given free rein to design this blueprint. With Mulvaney in charge, it was always going to be a bloodbath, full of the kinds of cuts to social spending Republicans have been advocating for years.

For that reason, the most important thing about the budget may be what's not in it. The plan reportedly will not call for any cuts to Medicare or Social Security benefits for seniors, which Trump promised not to touch during his presidential campaign (he also promised not to cut Medicaid and failed to mention that his promises to protect Social Security didn't include the disability portion of the program, which many of his supporters in West Virginia and Kentucky likely rely on, but who's counting?). Mulvaney personally supports raising the Social Security retirement age to 70 and means-testing Medicare benefits, but in April he said Trump had vetoed such changes to the programs. When it comes to those two entitlements, Trump is apparently checked in, resisting the traditional conservative agenda.

Otherwise, he's granting Paul Ryan permission to cut away.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/201 ... fying.html

[pErvinalia]

So there's literally no reason for concern?

I'm just asking if there is probable cause.

There's an allegation going around that Seth Rich was murdered because he was (a) going to testify against Hillary Clinton, and (b) was the guy who leaked the DNC documents to Wikileaks. A witness has come forward claiming personal knowledge, Kim Dotcom of Megaupload.

Should there be an investigation? Should the FBI "Russia investigation" be expanded to include the Set Rich murder, and the "contacts" and "collusion" in the DNC regarding Seth Rich, and their possible involvement? If so, why? If not, why not?

Is there literally no reason for concern about that?

with regard to most of the allegations I've heard about Trump, yes there is literally no reason for concern, because there seems to be this hysterical drive to characterize everything as a criminal conspiracy. Trump officials contact Russian officials in the lead-up to Trump taking office? That's only a problem because it's Trump.

No, it's because of their financial ties to Russia.

As that CNN guy said the other day, Trump could take a dump on the oval desk and you'd still defend him. There's literally nothing he can do that you find disturbing or at the very least suspect.

Firing Comey -- that's a big scandal only because Trump did it. The Democrats were calling for Comey's head, and basically railing against Comey for not resigning. So, Trump fires him and now it's an impeachable offense? Come on.

This has nothing to do with Democrats. Firing the guy who is investigating you and your team looks terribly suspect. It deserves further investigation, particularly concerning someone as dishonest as Trump.

If the prior President expressed "hope" that an investigation would be ended, nobody would bat an eye.

Yes they would. You are biased up the wahzoo.