Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III
Options
Comments
-
Are those facts or opinions? Looks to be opinions. If you contention is they are fact... then sources please.LeinsterDub wrote: »https://twitter.com/funder/status/988517173051183104?s=20
Honestly don't know what to make of this big deal? Or just a other day in Trump world?
So lets look at this. Trump is known to have used secret payments to avoid news of his extra marital affairs getting out.
Trump lied to the director of the FBI on his whereabouts in an attempt to 'prove' that he wasn't in an hotel room undertaking in extra marital affairs with hookers.
This cornerstone of his defence is now shown to be a lie.
So what could we possibly take from it? Should we go with the view that there is nothing at all in the story and that the Steele Dossier is complete bogus...
or should we take on board the evidence that Trump has no hang-ups about extra marital affairs, has no hang-ups about lying about them and has no hang-ups about using bribes and money to make the situation go away.
No of this proves he did anything but as I mentioned before, every time we think we have got to the end of something more real evidence comes out that shows that Trump is a total liar. Why would anyone place any credibility on anything a proven liar has to say?You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
Freedom of the press has nothing to do with it. The public had no right to know about Hannity. Perhaps the media suddenly found a smidgen of journalistic fortitude that they completely lost under the Obama administration and all of Hillary Clinton's shenanigans during the election. IMO. I guess we should thank Trump for that. Unfortunately I fear it will continue to be selective. How many other laws will be broken for the ends to justify the means in the taking down Trump and any conservatives with a national voice? Viva la police state?
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/sean-hannity-outing-violates-legal-standards/
Is this some sort of performance art?0 -
No, Mueller gave it to Rosenstein. That's a FACT, we know.
It was Rosenstein who decided what to do with the information.0 -
Freedom of the press has nothing to do with it. The public had no right to know about Hannity. Perhaps the media suddenly found a smidgen of journalistic fortitude that they completely lost under the Obama administration and all of Hillary Clinton's shenanigans during the election. IMO. I guess we should thank Trump for that. Unfortunately I fear it will continue to be selective. How many other laws will be broken for the ends to justify the means in the taking down Trump and any conservatives with a national voice? Viva la police state?
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/sean-hannity-outing-violates-legal-standards/
The court doesn't agree with you. An opinion piece against a considered legal verdict. Its a tough one. Yet again you go on about other stuff. Is it the courts, the media, the people, deep state? Is it really just Trump against the world at this stage?
And yet again you are completely missing the point (on purpose at this stage one can only suspect). Whether the public have a right to know or not is irrelevant if we are talking about an ordinary person, but Hannity has gone out to defend Cohen, calling into question the bias of the whole investigation when all the time he was biased. And not just because he felt some love for Cohen, but he had skin in the game. It is the very definition of someone trying to obstruct to help themselves.
Why would you not condemn this? If we believe that rather than simply a hatred of Obama or HC you care about fairness, and the law, why are you so quick so excuse the actions of Trump and his supporters.
Just yesterday we learned that Trump lied to the director of the FBI in an attempt to persuade him that a dossier that the FBI had and were currently investigating was false. He lied. For no other reason than to try to stop any further investigation. There is simply no other explanation as to why he would lie to Comey about his staying in Moscow.
Yet you have said nothing about a sitting POTUS lying directly to the head of the FBI to try to stop an investigation. You have said nothing about POTUS continuing to stand by Flynn who lied directly to FBI and even going as far as saying that even though what he did was illegal Trump expected nothing less.
So on one hand you have theories about shenanigans, and on the other you have clear proof of lying. If law was really your concern than there is clearly one that you should be most concerned with.0 -
Are those facts or opinions? Looks to be opinions. If you contention is they are fact... then sources please.
Here you go.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-23/flight-records-illuminate-mystery-of-trump-s-moscow-nights
You know, if you read more than just pro Trump pieces you would see this stuff for yourself.0 -
Advertisement
-
My own view is in about a year we won’t even be talking about Trump/Russian collusion as it will be determined to be a total bogus investigation based on a specious dossier based on information provided by Russian operatives and neither verified or investigated by the FBI before they sought a FISA warrant to spy on a presidential candidate. Instead we will be talking about the greatest scandal in US history involving in the lead up and following a presidential election of the illegal work to take out a candidate and then to try and destroy a dully elected president. The major culprits I forecast will be Hilllary Clinton and her cronies, the DNC, the Clinton Foundation, heads of the FBI, heads of the Department of Justice, and the State Department. History, IMO will judge them harshly... if justice isn't blind, that is.My own view on the dossier is that history will show that the American people were given clear and credible evidence that they had a serious problem on their hands but due to team loyalties and looking to get one over the 'libtards' they refused to see the danger and actively participated in the weakening of their own country.
Whether 100%, 50% or even 10% of the claims end up being true, the fact that so many were willing to simply dismiss it out of hand without any investigation will be something they will have to explain to later generations.
History, IMO, will judge them very harshly.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
Ah, the good old days when this was the Trump thread. Distant memories now.0
-
Yes, technically it was a NY State investigation. Mueller wanted something investigated and gave it to NY and said investigate this, IMO. In my view it is still Mueller handiwork.
Hold on. So you agree that technically it is NY investigation. That Mueller simply passed on info he had uncovered to the appropriate authorities. It went through Mueller, who passed it to Rosenstein, who passed it to SDNY DA. But Mueller somehow, someway (which I am sure you can't quite tell us but know it to be true) managed to override their clear objections for his own personal vendetta.
Why would Mueller not simply do it himself? He has a team of very competent legal minds (ask Flynn & Papodopolous, Manafort and Gates). Why would a man that has already filled multiple indictments want to hand over anything to another team, and possibly lose control over it?
But wait a sec, you view is different so therefore it must be Mueller.
You view is wrong.0 -
Yes, Mueller gave it to Rosenstien who have it to NY. $hit flows downhill.Water John wrote: »No, Mueller gave it to Rosenstein. That's a FACT, we know.
It was Rosenstein who decided what to do with the information.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
Proof that Trump lied to the FBI... please?Freedom of the press has nothing to do with it. The public had no right to know about Hannity. Perhaps the media suddenly found a smidgen of journalistic fortitude that they completely lost under the Obama administration and all of Hillary Clinton's shenanigans during the election. IMO. I guess we should thank Trump for that. Unfortunately I fear it will continue to be selective. How many other laws will be broken for the ends to justify the means in the taking down Trump and any conservatives with a national voice? Viva la police state?
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/sean-hannity-outing-violates-legal-standards/
The court doesn't agree with you. An opinion piece against a considered legal verdict. Its a tough one. Yet again you go on about other stuff. Is it the courts, the media, the people, deep state? Is it really just Trump against the world at this stage?
And yet again you are completely missing the point (on purpose at this stage one can only suspect). Whether the public have a right to know or not is irrelevant if we are talking about an ordinary person, but Hannity has gone out to defend Cohen, calling into question the bias of the whole investigation when all the time he was biased. And not just because he felt some love for Cohen, but he had skin in the game. It is the very definition of someone trying to obstruct to help themselves.
Why would you not condemn this? If we believe that rather than simply a hatred of Obama or HC you care about fairness, and the law, why are you so quick so excuse the actions of Trump and his supporters.
Just yesterday we learned that Trump lied to the director of the FBI in an attempt to persuade him that a dossier that the FBI had and were currently investigating was false. He lied. For no other reason than to try to stop any further investigation. There is simply no other explanation as to why he would lie to Comey about his staying in Moscow.
Yet you have said nothing about a sitting POTUS lying directly to the head of the FBI to try to stop an investigation. You have said nothing about POTUS continuing to stand by Flynn who lied directly to FBI and even going as far as saying that even though what he did was illegal Trump expected nothing less.
So on one hand you have theories about shenanigans, and on the other you have clear proof of lying. If law was really your concern than there is clearly one that you should be most concerned with.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
Advertisement
-
Post 4297, is worth preserving, for posterity.0
-
-
Proof that Trump lied to the FBI... please?
Did you read the article, did you read the memos?
We have a man that we know lies about his affairs, we have a man saying that the dossier is false. Was I in the room? No, so I have to use my judgement on who to believe.
DO I believe that Trump would have lied? Yes, 100%, we have proof of that almost everyday, and proof of his lying to cover up affairs.
Do you even suspect that the story might be true? What implications do you think would follow if it turns out he did lie?0 -
Still is about Trump... and things related to Trump... and the election Trump won despite almost insurmountable factors working against him.Professor Moriarty wrote: »Ah, the good old days when this was the Trump thread. Distant memories now.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
mcmoustache wrote: »That was claimed right here in this very forum by a user who has since closed his account so I won't quote him.
If I remember correctly, the claim was that dossier was created as a hoax by 4chan. This was around the time that it was published by buzzfeed. This lie was then repeated here by a poster who was either dishonest or credulous.
Since then, the origins of the dossier have been confirmed as have some of the claims within it. Basically, even Trump fans know that it wasn't a 4chan hoax so they attack it financing. They also loudly proclaimed the claim about Cohen in the Czech republic to be false - viewing this as proof that it's all false.
Forgetting for a moment the idea that one piece of information being incorrect in what is a collection of raw intelligence from human sources would invalidate the whole lot, this claim from Cohen that he wasn't in the Czech republic is now a bit iffy. Some days are accounted for but others not so much.
If it turns out that Cohen was there, I'm not sure what the next line will be. My guess is that we'll see a few posters close their accounts and spring up again ignoring the Cohen part and find some other claim to attack only to be proven wrong again - rince and repeat.
From what I remember a user on 4chan said he made up stuff and told a journalist. There weren't any details on what he said, just that he made something up. There were even fake pages floating around of Trump opening porn DVDs.
Then it suddenly became they paid Steele to make up a bunch of stuff for some reason and the 4chan stuff disappeared.
Really feel like they don't put any effort into the conspiracies anymore, it's all Schrodinger's Clinton who is both able to control governments and rig elections while being a frail old woman.0 -
My own view is in about a year we won’t even be talking about Trump/Russian collusion as it will be determined to be a total bogus investigation based on a specious dossier based on information provided by Russian operatives and neither verified or investigated by the FBI before they sought a FISA warrant to spy on a presidential candidate. Instead we will be talking about the greatest scandal in US history involving in the lead up and following a presidential election of the illegal work to take out a candidate and then to try and destroy a dully elected president. The major culprits I forecast will be Hilllary Clinton and her cronies, the DNC, the Clinton Foundation, heads of the FBI, heads of the Department of Justice, and the State Department. History, IMO will judge them harshly... if justice isn't blind, that is.
Either one of us COULD be right. We are both dealing with 3rd party facts.
The difference, as I see it, is that you aren't even willing to look at the dossier. You claim its a specious document, despite large portions of it being true. And the exact details aren't the story. Whether he had girls pissing on him is irrelevant, the mere fact that he got himself into a compromising position and continues to lie about should be raising red flags.
But you seem so uninterested in the possible danger in front of you, instead only looking in one direction. Have you asked yourself why, despite repeated calls from him boss, Sessions refuses to launch a new investigation on HC? Sessions can only win from that, what could possibly be holding him back? His boss, no. His voters, no. Something. Have you asked yourself that question?
You continue to go about the length of the Mueller investigation, yet HC has been under investigation for far longer with nothing to show for it and still people like you want to keep digging.
Its the hypocrisy that gets me. I have no gra for HC, and if she did wrong let her pay the price. But I also want a POTUS that isn't lying everyday, isn't trying to obstruct his way out of trouble, ins't so scared of something about Russia that he would cut the legs off the UN top diplomat to avoid having to deal with an angry Putin.0 -
Still is about Trump... and things related to Trump... and the election Trump won despite almost insurmountable factors working against him.
Great. So stop talking about Clinton all the time. Perish the thought, but people might start to think you were deflecting the conversation away from Trump.0 -
Funny Hannity banging on about elites. Guy owns 870 houses and is best buddies with the president.0
-
Join Date:Posts: 22733
My own view is in about a year we won’t even be talking about Trump/Russian collusion as it will be determined to be a total bogus investigation based on a specious dossier based on information provided by Russian operatives and neither verified or investigated by the FBI before they sought a FISA warrant to spy on a presidential candidate. Instead we will be talking about the greatest scandal in US history involving in the lead up and following a presidential election of the illegal work to take out a candidate and then to try and destroy a dully elected president. The major culprits I forecast will be Hilllary Clinton and her cronies, the DNC, the Clinton Foundation, heads of the FBI, heads of the Department of Justice, and the State Department. History, IMO will judge them harshly... if justice isn't blind, that is.
Reminder of earlier mod note. Less of this pleaseBaron de Charlus wrote: »This forum is for political discussion not conspiracy theories. Stick to the facts. There's a separate forum for conspiracy theory discussion.
Thanks0 -
I’m having a little problem understanding this. Are we saying flight records cast doubt on Trump's account of trip to Moscow and the whole thing revolves around the term 'overnight?'. That Trump lied to the FBI about not staying overnight in Moscow, when records state after he attended the Miss Universe pageant he went to an after-party at 1 am, then went to the airport to fly out at 3:58am, which wasn’t a fully overnight stay in Russia? I guess if the guy found time to gallivant with hookers in that busy schedule, he must be freakin’ Superman?Are those facts or opinions? Looks to be opinions. If you contention is they are fact... then sources please.
Here you go.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-23/flight-records-illuminate-mystery-of-trump-s-moscow-nights
You know, if you read more than just pro Trump pieces you would see this stuff for yourself.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
Advertisement
-
BabyCheeses wrote: »From what I remember a user on 4chan said he made up stuff and told a journalist. There weren't any details on what he said, just that he made something up. There were even fake pages floating around of Trump opening porn DVDs.
Then it suddenly became they paid Steele to make up a bunch of stuff for some reason and the 4chan stuff disappeared.
Really feel like they don't put any effort into the conspiracies anymore, it's all Schrodinger's Clinton who is both able to control governments and rig elections while being a frail old woman.
This has become all too common in the age of Trump - bad lying. They throw so many lies out that the lies don't actually make any sense when you take them as a whole. A truthful narrative doesn't change but a liar has to change his story as new facts emerge.
Lets say I saw somebody go into a shop, stuff a courgette into their trousers and leave without paying for it. Now let's say I challenge him a few doors down.
Here's how he would employ the Trumper strategy for lying.
Me: You stole a courgette from that shop.
Him: That's fake news! I was never in that shop.
Me: I saw you go into the shop. You're on CCTV. You stole a courgette from that shop.
Him: You "biased" news media claimed that I denied being in the shop. Bad! I was in the shop but they didn't have any carrots so I left. I didn't steal anything. Fake News!
Me: I saw you put the courgette into your pants and leave without paying. That's on CCTV too. You stole a courgette from that shop.
Him: Why are you being so unfair? Not good! Crooked Hillary bleached her emails and she's not in jail. DO SOMETHING!
In this type of interaction, it's pretty clear who's lying. It's the kind of thing we've know since we were kids. If someone keeps changing their story, they're lying. It's simple stuff that we saw on cop shows growing up.
Trump fans seem to have forgotten that entirely. Then again, maybe there's something of Sartre's antisemites critique going on here. Maybe they know that it's all lies but they feel like they're "trolling libs" by repeating these lies even if the lies keep changing. Maybe it's that they feel an obligation to do so due to tribalism. It's hard to believe that they believe these lies themselves since these lies keep changing and are inconsistent with each other.
Whatever their reasons for these lies, the internet records all the lies as they change and these people continue to get caught out in their lies and end up making tits of themselves when they go full Trumper.0 -
I’m having a little problem understanding this. Are we saying flight records cast doubt on Trump's account of trip to Moscow and the whole thing revolves around the term 'overnight?'. That Trump lied to the FBI about not staying overnight in Moscow, when records state after he attended the Miss Universe pageant he went to an after-party at 1 am, then went to the airport to fly out at 3:58am, which wasn’t a fully overnight stay in Russia? I guess if the guy found time to gallivant with hookers in that busy schedule, he must be freakin’ Superman?
Really? So you think one needs an overnight with hookers?
Trump used the term overnight to try to show that he couldn't have done what was alleged in the dossier. It turns out he had ample time. You are making the overnight claim sound weird when it was Trump that used it.
Am I to believe that you think Trump simply used the term overnight when he really meant to say that he never stayed long enough? We know he was in a hotel room, his body guard already gave evidence of that.
The story is that during his trip to Moscow, he used the services of hookers provided to him and that las lead to Moscow having kompromat on POTUS. Could it have happened in the time frames? Yes. Did it? no idea. But why wouldn't he simply say that he never had anyone back to his room, ask my bodyguard? Check the hotel tapes?
I am not discounting the theory that it isn't true, but you seem to completely discount that it could be. And to be clear, I don't care what he got up to, none of my business, whatever floats his boat. The issue becomes if Russia used this information, which if true we know that Trump would pay to keep out of the headlines, to compromise Trump.
We know that he has no issue with extra marital affairs. We know he pays off women to keep them quiet. We know he was on Moscow. We know of these rumours. We know he has been very slow to call out Putin on anything.
But Steele didn't know these things. It is awfully convenient that he made up a story that just happens to fit with stuff we later found out.0 -
-
notobtuse wrote:Trump will never get the Nobel Peace Prize. He could cure cancer, rid the world of nuclear weapons, end climate change, and find a cheap form of energy for the entire world in the form of cold fusion and the Nobel committee would completely ignore it all because, well simply because… Trump! IMO
He'd win it if he was worthy of the prize. The man's done more to split America in his tenure than anyone before him in my opinion.
He's done nothing close to even being mentioned in the same breath as a Noble prize.0 -
Some posters come on here, make wild allegations and then when it is pointed out to them that they are wrong, rather than appreciate the fact that you have advised them of the truth, they ignore that and move on to another wild allegation.
It is quite "Trumpian" behaviour, if I may invent a word.0 -
I wonder whether he is still beholden to Russia (if he was) when it is all seemingly in the open now.
They have no more levers with him do they?
Or is it his possible "financial" connections that have him entangled perhaps?(is he supposed to have loans from Russian banks that may not have been cosher)
Hope I am not falling foul of the conspiracy injunction I find it hard to keep abreast of all the information and speculation that keeps coming.0 -
-
I wonder whether he is still beholden to Russia (if he was) when it is all seemingly in the open now.
They have no more levers with him do they?
Or is it his possible "financial" connections that have him entangled perhaps?(is he supposed to have loans from Russian banks that may not have been cosher)
Hope I am not falling foul of the conspiracy injunction I find it hard to keep abreast of all the information and speculation that keeps coming.
He's still behaving as though he's beholden. He cancelled the sanctions on Deripaska's company on the condition that he "step aside".
There's something that's easy to forget with kompromat. The original indiscretion doesn't have to be a big deal but the subsequent indiscretions will be.
Here's a fictional example of the steps that could lead to a person being seriously compromised.
Some guy called Donald goes off to Moscow, is offered whores and has some fun with them. The next day, he finds out that the Russians have a tape of the night and doesn't want it getting out. At this point, Donald isn't really in trouble because he hasn't done anything illegal or immoral. Embarrassing maybe, but nothing immoral or illegal.
Now, let's say he needs some funding so off he goes to Russia. At this point, they can now add some illegal stuff such as a bit of light money laundering to any loan conditions due to this tape. Again, the activity on tape isn't illegal but now the money laundering sure as hell is.
At this point he's really on the hook and this can escalate with every interaction.
It's basically:
1. Get embarrassing blackmail - sex stuff, adultery etc
2. Using the embarrassing stuff, blackmail him into doing something illegal
3. Using the illegal stuff, blackmail him into doing something more illegal.
4. Go to 3.
It doesn't take long to own someone in this way.0 -
I don't think so. I would say because of Trump and the potential upcoming summit North Korea is talking about denuclearization. A possible significant movement toward peace. Possibly the best news for peace in decades. Yes, it is prudent to remain skeptical, but a positive development towards peace nonetheless. I know some would never give Trump credit for anything, but it is important to point out that Kim hasn't tested a missile since November. Trump will never get the prize, no matter what, IMO.notobtuse wrote:Trump will never get the Nobel Peace Prize. He could cure cancer, rid the world of nuclear weapons, end climate change, and find a cheap form of energy for the entire world in the form of cold fusion and the Nobel committee would completely ignore it all because, well simply because… Trump! IMO
He'd win it if he was worthy of the prize. The man's done more to split America in his tenure than anyone before him in my opinion.
He's done nothing close to even being mentioned in the same breath as a Noble prize.You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0 -
Advertisement
-
Those who have worked against him in probably underhanded manners… President Obama and his Department of Justice and key people within the FBI, his State Department, his UN Ambassador, Hillary Clinton and her campaign organization, and a biased media. I might have forgotten some. But I have already spoken about them all in depth, here.notobtuse wrote:Still is about Trump... and things related to Trump... and the election Trump won despite almost insurmountable factors working against him.
Which insurmountable factors?You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!
0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement