Trump brings the US yet another step towards becoming a Bana

So apparently Trump has just fired the FBI Director James Comey: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/09/po...ump-white-out/
Seemingly completely without reason... other than of course that Comey controls the FBI probe into his Russian connections, so the question is how much longer is Congress and US public going to accept this farce?

It seems obvious the Trump is using the office of President for personal gain, isn't that reason enough to impeach the Tangerine in Chief?
How much more will it take for people to see reason and realize that they're dealing with a wannabe despot and a madman?

Maybe it's because without zero evidence of any wrong doing on Trumps part the investigation is still going on? When Hillary Clinton broke a bunch of laws and they had solid evidence of the fact she broke these laws he didnt bring charges against her. How about the fact that Trump campaign was infact spied on and the FBI director lied about it. Then later admitted it but said it was legal surveillance. Comey was corrupt and should have been fired sooner. Only mistake Trump made was waiting for so long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elldallan

How much more will it take for people to see reason and realize that they're dealing with a wannabe despot and a madman?

---

Which people are you referring to? The majority of the American people are well aware of our dictator in chief.

It's ok. Comey made preparations and was expecting to be fired. A friendly reminder that Nixon repeatedly fired the people investigating him.

The intelligence community held Comey in pretty high regard, so the leaking that is almost sure to follow is going to be pretty great lol

Other than the west coast and inner cities,most people have no issues with the president. Thats the groups that voted for Hillary .The rest she forgot about. Comey wasnt even in control of his own department.

Comey is impossible to defend as a man just doing his job. In a press conference he detailed crimes Hillary Clinton committed but at the end of it said he wasn't going to charge her. Right their he lost any credibility in the intel community. Fyi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Maybe it's because without zero evidence of any wrong doing on Trumps part the investigation is still going on? When Hillary Clinton broke a bunch of laws and they had solid evidence of the fact she broke these laws he didnt bring charges against her. How about the fact that Trump campaign was infact spied on and the FBI director lied about it. Then later admitted it but said it was legal surveillance. Comey was corrupt and should have been fired sooner. Only mistake Trump made was waiting for so long.

---

The campaign of the Creature from the Orange Lagoon wasn't spied upon as far as we know, and as of yet absolutely zero evidence has been presented that the campaign itself was spied on.

On the other hand certain individuals within his campaign where spied upon because they were having suspect interactions with a foreign power, and those interactions where intercepted during regular intelligence operations against said foreign power!
And it has been all but established that Michael Flynn has either lied about his affiliations and interactions with foreign governments, or the campaign of President P*ssygrabber failed in their due dilligence to investigate somebody they appointed to national security advisor which speaks volumes about their incompetence. Michael Flynn as a former general was by law required to get pre-approval from the Pentagon before becoming a foreign agent and there has so far been no indications that he ever sought such a permission, and yet it's abundantly clear that Michael Flynn has been acting as a foreign agent on behalf of Turkey.

There has so far never been sufficient evidence that Hillary actually broke the law, did she act in a wildly inappropriate manner, yes.
But was it criminal? So far nobody has been able to gather enough evidence to prove any criminal intent, and putting Hillary behind bars was after all one of F*ckface von Clownstick's election promises, so if it had been possible to indict Hillary I'm sure that President P*ssygrabber would have had Jeff Sessions send it to court, but he didn't because there's not enough evidence to support a conviction.

So far we don't know what evidence there is or isn't about any alleged wrongdoings by Agent Orange because the investigation is still classified.
But if there's nothing to hide then there is no reason to fire Comey until the investigation is over. Because doing it now will only raises suspicions and create a PR nightmare of whether the Tangerine in Chief is trying to abuse the power of his office to protect himself, much like Richard "I'm not a crook" Nixon did. If there's nothing to hide then why has President Babyfingers still not released his Tax returns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thunder TA

Other than the west coast and inner cities,most people have no issues with the president.

---

Gallop pole 40% approval rating says otherwise

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elldallan

The campaign of the Creature from the Orange Lagoon wasn't spied upon as far as we know, and as of yet absolutely zero evidence has been presented that the campaign itself was spied on.

On the other hand certain individuals within his campaign where spied upon because they were having suspect interactions with a foreign power, and those interactions where intercepted during regular intelligence operations against said foreign power!
And it has been all but established that Michael Flynn has either lied about his affiliations and interactions with foreign governments, or the campaign of President P*ssygrabber failed in their due dilligence to investigate somebody they appointed to national security advisor which speaks volumes about their incompetence. Michael Flynn as a former general was by law required to get pre-approval from the Pentagon before becoming a foreign agent and there has so far been no indications that he ever sought such a permission, and yet it's abundantly clear that Michael Flynn has been acting as a foreign agent on behalf of Turkey.

There has so far never been sufficient evidence that Hillary actually broke the law, did she act in a wildly inappropriate manner, yes.
But was it criminal? So far nobody has been able to gather enough evidence to prove any criminal intent, and putting Hillary behind bars was after all one of F*ckface von Clownstick's election promises, so if it had been possible to indict Hillary I'm sure that President P*ssygrabber would have had Jeff Sessions send it to court, but he didn't because there's not enough evidence to support a conviction.

So far we don't know what evidence there is or isn't about any alleged wrongdoings by Agent Orange because the investigation is still classified.
But if there's nothing to hide then there is no reason to fire Comey until the investigation is over. Because doing it now will only raises suspicions and create a PR nightmare of whether the Tangerine in Chief is trying to abuse the power of his office to protect himself, much like Richard "I'm not a crook" Nixon did. If there's nothing to hide then why has President Babyfingers still not released his Tax returns?

---

Michael Flynn served and broke the law under Obama. Not Donald Trump and the security clearance was given by Obama administration Fyi.

Yes, Hillary Clinton broke the law, their is no exception under the law stating that being, dumb, irresponsible or not knowing the law excludes you from being liable. You don't need criminal intent when it comes to storing or sharing classified material either.Their are soldiers in jail right now for taking selfies in front or near something classified. Not serving month or two month jail time but multiple year sentences.

Finally I am glad the emails got released to show how corrupt the Democrats really Where. God bless Russains if they where behind it. Democrat party was exposed for being run by racist, scum bags who sold nothing but lies and bull****. Even they admit it and fired Everyone. Lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

Gallop pole 40% approval rating says otherwise

---

Same polls that had Clinton winning right ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

God bless Russains if they where behind it.

---

We're going to go ahead and save that and pull your patriot card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Same polls that had Clinton winning right ;)

---

Not to my knowledge, no. I don't believe Gallup did projections for the election this year.

But more importantly, do you have a credible source indicating that a majority of Americans are happy with Trump?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Michael Flynn served and broke the law under Obama. Not Donald Trump and the security clearance was given by Obama administration Fyi.

---

Yes he did, what's your point? My point is that Flynn was in line for an even higher security clearance than he had previously held and as such he was supposed to fill out and send in a federal form stating any ties to foreign governments. Either he didn't and the Short Fingered Vulgarian hired him anyway, or he lied on those forms as well. The White House hasn't released those documents at this time so we don't really know which is the case, although if he had lied on them they would have no doubt been in a rush to publish them because that would pout them off the hook... So the silence speaks volumes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Yes, Hillary Clinton broke the law, their is no exception under the law stating that being, dumb, irresponsible or not knowing the law excludes you from being liable. You don't need criminal intent when it comes to storing or sharing classified material either.Their are soldiers in jail right now for taking selfies in front or near something classified. Not serving month or two month jail time but multiple year sentences.

---

So why has there been no prosecution then? She wasn't given amnesty by Obama before he got out of office and it was one of the Liar in Chief's election promises to "put her behind bars". If they really have sufficient evidence to support inditing Hillary then why isn't the Tangerine in Chief having her prosecuted?
The crime that she might be accused of is: "to knowingly or through gross negligence disclose classified information to someone not authorized to receive it". And it hasn't been proven that the information was ever disclosed to somebody who didn't have the proper security clearances, which is required. So if they can ever prove that then they can put her in jail because the handling was obviously either knowingly or grossly negligent.
Possibly she cleaned out any incriminating information really well, or it's also possible that she never disclosed classified information to someone not authorized to receive it.

As for those soldiers, they were prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is generally much much harsher with these things because the military requires a much higher standards from their employees than does civilian laws. It could also be proven that they had released that information to somebody who hadn't been cleared to receive it. Hillary is not nor she ever(to my knowledge) been a member of the United States Armed Forces and therefore she's not subject to the UCMJ and as such she has to be prosecuted under federal law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Finally I am glad the emails got released to show how corrupt the Democrats really Where. God bless Russains if they where behind it. Democrat party was exposed for being run by racist, scum bags who sold nothing but lies and bull****. Even they admit it and fired Everyone. Lol

---

It's good to know that you support a foreign state committing crimes against US citizens... Not even the Republicans in the Senate or the House goes quite that far, probably because they realize the implications which you clearly does not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elldallan

Yes he did, what's your point? My point is that Flynn was in line for an even higher security clearance than he had previously held and as such he was supposed to fill out and send in a federal form stating any ties to foreign governments. Either he didn't and the Short Fingered Vulgarian hired him anyway, or he lied on those forms as well. The White House hasn't released those documents at this time so we don't really know which is the case, although if he had lied on them they would have no doubt been in a rush to publish them because that would pout them off the hook... So the silence speaks volumes


So why has there been no prosecution then? She wasn't given amnesty by Obama before he got out of office and it was one of the Liar in Chief's election promises to "put her behind bars". If they really have sufficient evidence to support inditing Hillary then why isn't the Tangerine in Chief having her prosecuted?
The crime that she might be accused of is: "to knowingly or through gross negligence disclose classified information to someone not authorized to receive it". And it hasn't been proven that the information was ever disclosed to somebody who didn't have the proper security clearances, which is required. So if they can ever prove that then they can put her in jail because the handling was obviously either knowingly or grossly negligent.
Possibly she cleaned out any incriminating information really well, or it's also possible that she never disclosed classified information to someone not authorized to receive it.

As for those soldiers, they were prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which is generally much much harsher with these things because the military requires a much higher standards from their employees than does civilian laws. It could also be proven that they had released that information to somebody who hadn't been cleared to receive it. Hillary is not nor she ever(to my knowledge) been a member of the United States Armed Forces and therefore she's not subject to the UCMJ and as such she has to be prosecuted under federal law.

It's good to know that you support a foreign state committing crimes against US citizens... Not even the Republicans in the Senate or the House goes quite that far, probably because they realize the implications which you clearly does not.

---

So Obama failed to police Flynn but Trump did and fired Flynn. Maybe if Obama administration was paying closer attention it could have saved Trump the hassle of having to deal with it.

Clinton can still have charges brought against her. Its possible thats the reason they fired Comey because they where doing a investigation into Clinton and found wrong doing on Comey part. No Civilions are held to the same standards as military personal when it comes to storing and sending classified material. Only difference is where they are put in prison because military prison hard labor is still allowed.

Russia didn't actually interfere at all in the election. All they did was released emails that members of the DNC actually wrote. Maybe if the DNC wouldn't have fixed the primaries, insulted Bernie Sanders supports, given Hillary all the questions ahead of time. Insulted multiple race's and religion's. Your argument is like blaming the guy for video taping the crime for the actual crime that was committed. Russia didn't make the DNC, be racist, cheating bigots, that fixed there primaries. They just shined a light on the fact of what they truly Where.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Russia didn't actually interfere at all in the election.

---

This is false. Both bipartisan investigations in the house and Senate as well as the FBI openly say that Russia interfered with our election.

The only questions are if those interferences had an impact on the outcome of the election (which is something no one will be able to determine) and if the Trump campaign knowingly colluded with them (which is being investigated).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

This is false. Both bipartisan investigations in the house and Senate as well as the FBI openly say that Russia interfered with our election.

The only questions are if those interferences had an impact on the outcome of the election (which is something no one will be able to determine) and if the Trump campaign knowingly colluded with them (which is being investigated).

---

I guess it depends on what you consider interference. To me releasing emails that are legit and not altered in anyway to the public is not interference to me. How about this the DNC should stop being corrupt racist politicians rigging their primaries. Yet you dwell on how we got the emails. Just seems ridicules all together honestly. What's even dumber is if Democrats did succeed at impeachment you would end up with Pence as president. Go from one of the most liberal Republicans ever to hold office to the most hardcore right President in Pence. That's almost as dumb as Democrats demanding Trump fire Comey and when he does they call it a cover up. I guess their is no end to the stupidity of Democratic lawmakers.

I won't be responding to any of that, but you can look forward to me correcting the blatantly false information you try to propagate on these forums.

Good day comrade.

Well to be fair without me talking these threads would be extremely one sided and really bare of any discussion. But yeah I agree I grow tired of arguing just to argue. So I will just call it quits in the forum. Good luck to all of you and wish you luck. ;)

...

The problem with the spin from the right is that democrats aren't upset over the fact that Trump fired Comey. The guy made plenty of mistakes and probably didn't deserve his job. They're upset that Trump fired the guy who is responsible for an ongoing investigation surrounding him.

At best it's a completely unprofessional and untimely decision. At worst it's an incredibly obvious cover up attempt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

The problem with the spin from the right is that democrats aren't upset over the fact that Trump fired Comey. The guy made plenty of mistakes and probably didn't deserve his job. They're upset that Trump fired the guy who is responsible for an ongoing investigation surrounding him.

At best it's a completely unprofessional and untimely decision. At worst it's an incredibly obvious cover up attempt.

---

As Trump basically admitted that he did it "over the Russia thing" thing it's obstruction of justice pure and simple, Trump basically admitted that he did it with criminal intent. If the Republitards still refuse to appoint a truly independent investigator on the matter then this is worse than Watergate.

Just look at Trump now trying to appoint a partisan political hack as FBI Director.

I find it extremely scary the fact the media is out there making stuff up. It's incredible and going to end up being the little boy who cried wolf. Just this week alone they have pushed completely far fetched stories with zero evidence. Personally I stopped listening all together to any media outlet.

What stories have their pushed with zero evidence?

Edit: also, welcome back handofthrawn. Your alternative name is more fitting imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

What stories have their pushed with zero evidence?

Edit: also, welcome back handofthrawn. Your alternative name is more fitting imo

---

Handofthrawn is my brother, meh I don't follow politics like he does though. I just see all these crazy things flung out there. Then they retract them a day later. Just to throw more stuff out there to retract them.

What's been retracted?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

Maybe it's because without zero evidence of any wrong doing on Trumps part the investigation is still going on?

---

So Trump keeps saying. But the reality is that the general public - and likely Trump himself - doesn't know what the FBI has or doesn't have.

And, more importantly, it is REALLY not the place of the *subjects* of an investigation to say to law enforcement, "Nothing to see here, move along."

If Comey were on a wild goose chase or fishing trip with no basis, because of a political axe to grind, then that would be something for the Deputy AG to take issue with. And *that* is a notable absence in the Deputy AG's memorandum - there's no contention, by the senior Justice Department official overseeing the matter - that there's something improper in the pursuit of the investigation. (Quite the contrary, the Deputy AG has now appointed independent counsel. Of course, this isn't a finding of guilt, but it's certainly an admission that "This is a matter worth investigating.")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elldallan

As Trump basically admitted that he did it "over the Russia thing" thing it's obstruction of justice pure and simple, Trump basically admitted that he did it with criminal intent.

---

The truth is that I don't think we can put it *quite* that strongly. There are possible innocent characterizations for Trump's language. In the interview, he talked about what he was thinking about, but not so much 'why'. I could easily make the argument that he was acknowledging that there just wasn't a good time to do it, because of the Russia investigation, but that he rationalized making the call *despite* the Russia investigation because there was nothing to that anyways...

...not that I believe that for a second, but it's perfectly consistent with Trump's language. My point is just that I don't think we have a smoking gun, and there's a lot more work to be done before we can say that he's done. Besides, if he's actually trying to bury the investigation, I'd MUCH rather get him on the crap he's trying to hide, rather than merely the fact of trying to hide it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Palem

What's been retracted?

---

Let's see, there's the White House's position that the Comey firing was a bottom-up process that started with the Deputy AG...the White House's position that Trump didn't reveal any classified information...the list is long.

Oh, we're talking about media retractions? Well, there's the retraction of the claim that Spicer was hiding "in" the bushes, when in fact he was hiding "among" the bushes...

As is the natural laws of the land

White House: "Donald Trump absolutely did not do that!"
Trump: "I totally did that."
White House: "This doesn't contradict our previous statement. The media needs to stop this witch hunt!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldhearted

I find it extremely scary the fact the media is out there making stuff up. It's incredible and going to end up being the little boy who cried wolf. Just this week alone they have pushed completely far fetched stories with zero evidence. Personally I stopped listening all together to any media outlet.

---

Here is my problem. Yes there are media outlets that skew coverage to fit their agenda. To hear republicans cry about it astounds me... Fox news, Rush Limbaugh etc etc etc have been doing the same for decades. The liberal media is no more at fault than conservative media.
The real issue is when the president lies to us. Bald faced lies. This 'fake news media' crap pales in comparison to the utter bull**** being spewed by Trump and his administration.
Besides, there are still reputable sources for less biased coverage if you look around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds

Here is my problem. Yes there are media outlets that skew coverage to fit their agenda. To hear republicans cry about it astounds me... Fox news, Rush Limbaugh etc etc etc have been doing the same for decades. The liberal media is no more at fault than conservative media.

---

I entirely agree with your post, but I think we're getting to a point where 'everyone has a bias' has turned into a perception that facts, too, have a bias - and, more particularly, a right-wing belief that notions of 'facts' and 'evidence' are just left-wing constructs. If I hold this pen out in front of me, and release it, it will fall. This is a fact. This isn't a projection of political values, a function of ideological bias, etc.

Facts aren't democratic, and you can't effectively run a country on the basis of a belief that they are. When mainstream politicians denigrate the very concept of professional expertise and scientific study as being politically driven...that's a pretty massive problem. But if people believe that facts are subjective, then 'lies', too, become pretty subjective.

As the saying goes, you're entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swirvin'Birds

Here is my problem. Yes there are media outlets that skew coverage to fit their agenda. To hear republicans cry about it astounds me... Fox news, Rush Limbaugh etc etc etc have been doing the same for decades. The liberal media is no more at fault than conservative media.
The real issue is when the president lies to us. Bald faced lies. This 'fake news media' crap pales in comparison to the utter bull**** being spewed by Trump and his administration.
Besides, there are still reputable sources for less biased coverage if you look around.

---

I am not talking about Fox VS MSNBC, but I am talking about what used to be considered unbiased news. Which now push completely far fetched stories with zero evidence and they later retract. Just saying media has went to far and now I would say 40 to 50% of the population will no longer believe anything they will say ever again. That is a scary thought as a whole but the media has went off the deep. My brother has a good tract record when it comes to protecting presidential winners. He said Trump would win hands down and is predicting Trump winning by a larger margin next time. This thing between the media and Trump has gotten personal. Media is out for blood and it's so obvious that anyone can see it. But in doing so they have undermined the credibility of journalism and Media across the USA.

Again, what has been retracted? I can think of a couple very minor stories that have been retracted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chanain

The truth is that I don't think we can put it *quite* that strongly. There are possible innocent characterizations for Trump's language. In the interview, he talked about what he was thinking about, but not so much 'why'. I could easily make the argument that he was acknowledging that there just wasn't a good time to do it, because of the Russia investigation, but that he rationalized making the call *despite* the Russia investigation because there was nothing to that anyways...

...not that I believe that for a second, but it's perfectly consistent with Trump's language. My point is just that I don't think we have a smoking gun, and there's a lot more work to be done before we can say that he's done. Besides, if he's actually trying to bury the investigation, I'd MUCH rather get him on the crap he's trying to hide, rather than merely the fact of trying to hide it.

---

Well lets see here... “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
What is that if not a smoking gun?
And lets be clear, not even the White House is trying to denounce that media report of the summary as false, which means that either that is accurate or what's in the summary is even worse...

And personally I think getting Agent Orange on "just" obstruction is a start, it can be done quickly and relatively painlessly. We can the spend the next several years hashing out exactly what the Orange-Tufted Swamp Ogre was trying to hide, but if we wait than it's possible that by the time it's all done he's already sold out everything to Russia and ran off to the Cayman Islands with the proceeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldhearted

I am not talking about Fox VS MSNBC, but I am talking about what used to be considered unbiased news. Which now push completely far fetched stories with zero evidence and they later retract. Just saying media has went to far and now I would say 40 to 50% of the population will no longer believe anything they will say ever again. That is a scary thought as a whole but the media has went off the deep. My brother has a good tract record when it comes to protecting presidential winners. He said Trump would win hands down and is predicting Trump winning by a larger margin next time. This thing between the media and Trump has gotten personal. Media is out for blood and it's so obvious that anyone can see it. But in doing so they have undermined the credibility of journalism and Media across the USA.

---

Exactly what on the media reporting on ****face von Clownstick is farfetched and untrue? Because lets be clear, a whole lot of the media reports seem very farfetched, but after a little while they turn out to be basically true, which of course is important.
For example the reporting that the Short-Fingered Vulgarian had leaked sensitive classified intelligence to Russia during a private meeting with the Russian foreign minister no less seemed really far-fetched. I mean not even the Angry Pumpkin is that stupid right?... aaaaaand then the White House says, "well actually the President can unclassify intelligence, so he didn't leak any classified intelligence to the Russians." *facepalm*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elldallan

Well lets see here... “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”
What is that if not a smoking gun?
And lets be clear, not even the White House is trying to denounce that media report of the summary as false, which means that either that is accurate or what's in the summary is even worse...

And personally I think getting Agent Orange on "just" obstruction is a start, it can be done quickly and relatively painlessly. We can the spend the next several years hashing out exactly what the Orange-Tufted Swamp Ogre was trying to hide, but if we wait than it's possible that by the time it's all done he's already sold out everything to Russia and ran off to the Cayman Islands with the proceeds.


Exactly what on the media reporting on ****face von Clownstick is farfetched and untrue? Because lets be clear, a whole lot of the media reports seem very farfetched, but after a little while they turn out to be basically true, which of course is important.
For example the reporting that the Short-Fingered Vulgarian had leaked sensitive classified intelligence to Russia during a private meeting with the Russian foreign minister no less seemed really far-fetched. I mean not even the Angry Pumpkin is that stupid right?... aaaaaand then the White House says, "well actually the President can unclassify intelligence, so he didn't leak any classified intelligence to the Russians." *facepalm*

---

Stories such as the entire video of Trump and hookers giving him a golden shower. Which proved to be 100% false. Trump having ties to the Russians even though their is zero proof of it. See in the old days Media outlets actually had to have proof before reporting something. Let's go into classified stuff the media reports that story and completely gets it 100% wrong. Their source wasn't even in the room. Lol. The Media knows the President can release any thing he wants also. They just stretched the truth to make Trump look bad. Report the other day of Trumps daughter doing pay to play by one reporter using a article from her own newspaper as proof, even though in the newspaper article it specifically says it wasn't her charity she raised the money for. I could go on but honestly I don't really care that much. Just I haven't met one person who actually dislikes Trumps in person or believes the Media anymore. So in my view that is scary. Anyways you guys on her are some rude ass holes and I will avoid this thread from now on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldhearted

Stories such as the entire video of Trump and hookers giving him a golden shower. Which proved to be 100% false.

---

This was not proven to be false. Most of the dossier has since been proven to be true. For what it's worth, he wasn't having the hookers per on him. They were peeing on the bed.

Quote:

---

Trump having ties to the Russians even though their is zero proof of it.

---

There is a ton of proof that Trump has ties with Russia.

Quote:

---

See in the old days Media outlets actually had to have proof before reporting something.

---

News stories have to follow leads and dig a bit to develop a story. It's not like a newspaper just gets an anonymous tip and then they'll write up a front page headline story for the next day. Those stories get confirmed by multiple sources or those sources send them something to prove their claims.

With the way Trump has proven that he will fire anyone who speaks out against him are you really that surprised that people want to remain anonymous? You're really jumping head first towards of line of thinking that leads to Nixon being innocent and the media making up stories from their anonymous sources.

Quote:

---

Let's go into classified stuff the media reports that story and completely gets it 100% wrong.

---

They didn't get it 100% wrong and nothing was retracted.

Quote:

---

Their source wasn't even in the room. Lol. The Media knows the President can release any thing he wants also. They just stretched the truth to make Trump look bad.

---

No. They didn't mislead anyone or stretch any truth. Every news outlet I watched or listened to made it perfectly clear that president can declassify anything he wants. The fact that he declassified some information wasn't the story. The story was that Trump gave up highly classified information to the Russians (shocking) not only in exchange for nothing, but it wasn't even our own intelligence. It makes the entire US intelligence community look unreliable when allies trust us with information and then the president feels free to share that intelligence with whoever because he just feels like doing it. That's how you stop getting trusted with international intelligence.

Quote:

---

Report the other day of Trumps daughter doing pay to play by one reporter using a article from her own newspaper as proof, even though in the newspaper article it specifically says it wasn't her charity she raised the money for.

---

I'm not familiar with this. Source?

Quote:

---

Just I haven't met one person who actually dislikes Trumps in person or believes the Media anymore. So in my view that is scary. Anyways you guys on her are some rude ass holes and I will avoid this thread from now on.

---

Where to you live? Who do you talk to? I for one am very proud of the media for doing their jobs. Investigative reporting had been dead for years and I'm much happier to be getting more stories out of Washington and less stories about Ling Ling the panda and just how cute he is.

Even if you ignore the media and outside sources I don't see how anyone cannot see that President Trump is not the right fit for the job.
The people he hired and appointed are constantly giving statements that either misquote the President or are contrary to the things the President said.
That means either he is a pretty good business man and hired brilliant people that do their jobs diligently but he lacks the moral fortitude befitting his office. Or he actually is a good guy but hired all kinds of people stabbing his back which makes him a bad leader.

Or, he's just a filthy liar and a hypocrite with his 'drain the swamp'. Occam's razor.

But, if the people want filthy lies and hypocrisy, wouldn't it be a good politician's duty to supply?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TommyB

But, if the people want filthy lies and hypocrisy, wouldn't it be a good politician's duty to supply?

---

I don't think any people objectively want that, they're all either so jaded/disenfranchised about only ever getting that already so that they don't give a **** anymore. Or they're deluded by the shiny cloth that's pulled over their heads.

When 60+% of the population wants the president to not do something and he does it anyway he is no longer a president, he is a dictator.

The one thing you guys all are missing is Trump voters do not believe or care what the media says, what polls say or any other politicians have to say. The man is doing exactly what he promised he would do when elected. That is extremely rare in a politician. Such as this week leaving the Paris climate treaty. Which was a joke, USA gives up everything and has our energy cost triple which is devastating for the poor and businesses. While China and India gives up nothing plus negates any saving of the planet we attempt to do. On top of that we have to pay 100 billion dollars to third world country's so they can build power plants. But we can't even take care of our vets in this country and have a homeless problem. I guarantee Trump wins in 2020. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handofthrawn

The one thing you guys all are missing is Trump voters do not believe or care what the media says, what polls say or any other politicians have to say.

---

We're all perfectly aware that Trump voters are detached from reality and refuse to acknowledge any truth of reality beyond their experience.

Quote:

---

The man is doing exactly what he promised he would do when elected.

---

I wouldn't say "exactly". Trump has by far not lived up to his campaign promises. Though to his credit, we're only months into his administration, even though it feels like it's been decades.

Quote:

---

That is extremely rare in a politician.

---

It's not.

Quote:

---

Which was a joke, USA gives up everything and has our energy cost triple which is devastating for the poor and businesses.

---

While I'm not completely sure what you mean by "gives up everything" I'm very sure it's inaccurate as well as your claim that our energy costs have tripled. I welcome sources that back up these claims.

Quote:

---

While China and India gives up nothing plus negates any saving of the planet we attempt to do. On top of that we have to pay 100 billion dollars to third world country's so they can build power plants.

---

I believe that countries like China and India are held to the same standards, they're simply just given more time to get to the standards that the agreement calls for.

Quote:

---

But we can't even take care of our vets in this country and have a homeless problem.

---

I'd like to think that a country as vast and wealthy as America is capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

Quote:

---

I guarantee Trump wins in 2020. ;)

---

I doubt that, but in all fairness I highly doubted his victory in the first place, so we'll see.