President 'The Donald' Trump and Surprising Consequences - Mod warning in OP

uck51js9zml2yt

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

If you want insight into Flynn look into his situation with Obama when he left, his past tweets or his sons active Twitter @ mike Flynn jr. Oh and Trump encouraged him to testify publicly with a tweet.

Could trump have done anything else??

Perhaps...Don't testify, it only feeds the fake news!

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

An administration used agency surveillance programs to spy and unmask on a political opponent then spread that info widely even leaking it to the press all for political gain.

You could say the reports about the info from Nunes not being related to Russia are questionable, but then again Susan Rice is the person who went on 5 different Sunday shows and lied about Benghazi blaming it on an internet video, strangely enough in the run up of another election.

Podesta fell for a basic phishing scam, the DNC had no security and were hacked likely multiple times, the RNC luckily didn't have clowns running their security operation, get over it.

That third paragraph still fits in with what you said about the first one. (Even if the techniques used were simple- I think it is hilarious that you think it makes a difference, your political opponent must fall for a scam at least dumb for it to be morally correct:p)

Ok. Final attempt here. Was what Flynn did an issue that the fbi should be looking given his position? If so isn't that the exact sort of thing security agencies should be looking into without an administration telling them one way or another?

Leroy42

Hank, I'm a little confused here.

Trump actively said on the campaign that he doesn't care how information is leaked (podesta e-mails) once the information is right to be out there. He also invited Russia to try to get their hands on the missing e-mails.

We now have a situation whereby it would appear that Team Trump has been in contact with suspected Russian agents or at the very least persons that the NSA had concern about and were surveiling. Are you disputing that?

There is only two possible scenarios. Either Team Trump had contact with these people and as such got caught in the surveillance net, or they didn't at it all made up. That is the core point.

Who leaked, who unmasked, whether it was for political gain by Obama or HC or whatever, are secondary questions. If you are of the belief that Team Trump had no contact then the secondary points are all mute. Nobody leaked, nobody unmasked. At most someone made up a story.

But again, Trump, through his wiretapping tweets (amongst others) has shown that he is not against making stuff up so that can't be the issue.

So please help me out here. Do you think Team Trump had contact with Russia persons of interest?

Hank Scorpio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

All too predictable.

She was on PBS lieing a week ago saying she knew nothing about unmasking and today she released a statement saying there was. Why lie?

She almost tops that clown on MSNBC last month on morning Joe spilling the beans.

Hank Scorpio

Leroy42 wrote: »

Hank, I'm a little confused here.

Trump actively said on the campaign that he doesn't care how information is leaked (podesta e-mails) once the information is right to be out there.

Link please.

Leroy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Link please.

I'll dig it out.

What is your position on the question I asked?

Do you believe Team Trump had contact with Russians or is the whole thing a fabrication?

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

Ok. Final attempt here. Was what Flynn did an issue that the fbi should be looking given his position? If so isn't that the exact sort of thing security agencies should be looking into without an administration telling them one way or another?

The FBI cleared Flynn's call. NYT and others reported it, can't link on phone.

Hank Scorpio

Leroy42 wrote: »

I'll dig it out.

What is your position on the question I asked?

Do you believe Team Trump had contact with Russians or is the whole thing a fabrication?

Trump never said what you stated.

Contact yes, collusion no.

Leroy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Trump never said what you stated.

Contact yes, collusion no.

I am pretty sure he did, but I will accept that I don't have to proof to hand so will accept your position.

So you accept that Team Trump had contact. Can you please provide the transcripts of these meetings. you obviously have them to be able to state that no collusion took place.

Hank Scorpio

Santiago Ripe Textile wrote: »

Could trump have done anything else??

Perhaps...Don't testify, it only feeds the fake news!

Obvious answer is to say nothing. On the topic of fake news, it's been muh Russia for 6 months now in the media and not a shred of evidence proving collusion. The msm are nothing more than political activists.

Hank Scorpio

Leroy42 wrote: »

I am pretty sure he did, but I will accept that I don't have to proof to hand so will accept your position.

So you accept that Team Trump had contact. Can you please provide the transcripts of these meetings. you obviously have them to be able to state that no collusion took place.

It's up to the accusers to prove it and you're wrong he never said that.

Leroy42

Sorry, Hank, need to update me previous answer.

On 10.10.2016 Trump stated "Wikileaks, I love Wikileaks"

So he has no problem with information being leaked so can you please stop wasting time talking about who leaked etc as Trump doesn't think that leaking is a problem

Hank Scorpio

That's not the part I quoted.

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

The FBI cleared Flynn's call. NYT and others reported it, can't link on phone.

Good to hear that he had no involvement with the Turkish government or undeclared income from the Russia.

Leroy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It's up to the accusers to prove it and you're wrong he never said that.

I completley agree, however you are not in that position. You stated that no collusion took place.

I am asking how you know that. Now, its perfectly reasonable to state that at this point no collusion has been proven, but all the evidence would point to the possibility and that it should be investigated.

So far, we have lies from Flynn, Sessions and possible surveillence of team Trump in contact, despite Trump saying that he know of no one who had any contact.

Surely at this point even Trump must be wondering what was going on without his knowledge

Leroy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

The FBI cleared Flynn's call. NYT and others reported it, can't link on phone.

Ah great, so you want to rely on the FBI then.

So, why do you think the FBI is currently actively investigating Team Trump?

Kitsunegari

Leroy42 wrote: »

I am pretty sure he did, but I will accept that I don't have to proof to hand so will accept your position.

So you accept that Team Trump had contact. Can you please provide the transcripts of these meetings. you obviously have them to be able to state that no collusion took place.

Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? The burden of proof is on you. You can't prove something didn't happen so it's incredible that you would suggest that you have to prove that Trump is innocent rather than assume he is innocent.

It's clear the the intelligence services have absolutely no proof of collusion with the Russians. If they do why don't they release it? Like the WMD in Iraq, nothing is to be taken seriously from the US intelligence services. People have clearly learned nothing from the past.

Now we have reporters like Maggie Haberman withholding information from the public because it doesn't suit her agenda against Trump.

Right now, this is nothing but smoke and mirrors from the intelligence agencies and the Democrats. Where is the evidence Leroy? or is this just another scaremongering witch hunt?

Hank Scorpio

Christy42 wrote: »

Good to hear that he had no involvement with the Turkish government or undeclared income from the Russia.

It's unheard of you're right. A politician getting paid for lobbying and doing favours. Still isn't evidence of collusion. How much did Russia pay Podesta again? Or the Saudis Hillary. Not an eyelid would have been lifted or was lifted during her state term and many of those payments were undisclosed.

Let him testify. Maybe he's a Russian secret agent and Trump like a evil mastermind has evaded everyone who knows. Gotta wait and see.

Professor Moriarty

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It's unheard of you're right. A politician getting paid for lobbying and doing favours. Still isn't evidence of collusion. How much did Russia pay Podesta again? Or the Saudis Hillary. Not an eyelid would have been lifted or was lifted during her state term and many of those payments were undisclosed.

Let him testify. Maybe he's a Russian secret agent and Trump like a evil mastermind has evaded everyone who knows. Gotta wait and see.

Hillary who?

Billy86

Christy42 wrote: »

Come to think of were you not the poster who said they would stop supporting Trump if he started to bring in anti lgbt information? Or am I getting mixed up? http://www.advocate.com/politics/2017/3/29/trump-covertly-dismantles-obama-era-lgbt-protections

I could have sworn I remembered the same, with Trump claiming he would not repeal the anti discrimination rule against gay people being used to back up how Trump would not be a threat to the LGBT community?

Hank Scorpio

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Hillary who?

Sneer all you want but it may well turn out Intel was being fed to her campaign.

Billy86

Leroy42 wrote: »

So far, we have lies from Flynn, Sessions and possible surveillence of team Trump in contact, despite Trump saying that he know of no one who had any contact.

You left out Carter Page, as well as Sean Spicer in claiming Manafort only played "a very small role for a short period of time" or whatever it was, and Nunes' multitude of bullsh** including trying to claim he had never heard of Roger Stone or Paul Manafort.

Igotadose

Kitsunegari wrote: »

It's clear the the intelligence services have absolutely no proof of collusion with the Russians. If they do why don't they release it?

Once there are indictments, the materials will be out. It's not 'proof' till the courts decide it is.

Unlike Devin Nunes, releasing material outside investigations is NOT a good thing (even if it's seemingly in his case, getting material from one part of the WH and releasing it to another, where the POTUS promptly compromises it by blathering on Twitter.)
And, they have enough to keep them interested; remember what Comey said, they get a flood of suggestions for investigations and can't spend resources on all of them.


Whether the agency's timings suits some media types agendas is irrelevant. Time will tell. This is why Grand Jury work is so important.

Hank Scorpio

I replied to the lgbt claims ages ago in that AH thread, feel free to look it up.

Truly sad existence in this thread when you need to bring up something so off topic simply because I have opposing views. How many of you are left posting regulary now, 12?

Doesn't it get tedious agreeing with each other all day and jerking each other off? I thought diversity was important.

Professor Moriarty

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Sneer all you want but it may well turn out Intel was being fed to her campaign.

Conjecture and deflection. What's that got to do with Trump's connections to Russia?

Professor Moriarty

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I replied to the lgbt claims ages ago in that AH thread, feel free to look it up.

Truly sad existence in this thread when you need to bring up something so off topic simply because I have opposing views. How many of you are left posting regulary now, 12?

Doesn't it get tedious agreeing with each other all day and jerking each other off? I thought diversity was important.

Off topic? Yet you brought Hillary up a few posts ago. Rather ironic.

listermint

When losing the debate make sure you get thrown out of it by calling people names ...

Chips Lovell

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Doesn't it get tedious agreeing with each other all day and jerking each other off? I thought diversity was important.

Banned for a day

Christy42

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

It's unheard of you're right. A politician getting paid for lobbying and doing favours. Still isn't evidence of collusion. How much did Russia pay Podesta again? Or the Saudis Hillary. Not an eyelid would have been lifted or was lifted during her state term and many of those payments were undisclosed.

Let him testify. Maybe he's a Russian secret agent and Trump like a evil mastermind has evaded everyone who knows. Gotta wait and see.

Should Flynn have disclosed the income?

Does it show that the investigation was not a witch hunt?

Does it show that there are dodgy dealings within the Trump campaign?

Is it evidence that investigations should keep going?

I do like your diversity claim later on. Should we stop arguing against so we can keep a Trump supporter around? I will admit someone willing to defend* the man is a rarity these days.

* well talk about Hillary, let's be honest defending the man is an impossibility at this point. Therefore attacks on the opposition (from 6 months ago) with the same tired bull (how is Trump doing at standing up to Saudi now you mention it).

Billy86

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102452295&postcount=5396
If Trump or any of his administration actively promote or seek to remove LGBT rights while in power I will drop any support I have for them. Pence has a checkered past but it's not his right to impose what he believes on others. Up to now they've been following through with campaign promises but something like that would be over the line. I wouldn't be alone, many of his supporters would react the same imo.

and back in January

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've read in many places Trump is going to go after LGBT rights. He added lgbt protection to the vetting bill and the white house today released this.

"In a statement released early Tuesday, the White House says Trump "is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community" and that he "continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election.""

https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/826405148461195264

That wound up being the exact piece of legislation he removed only weeks after the debacle over transgender people and bathroom which is not going to effect their absurdly high rate of suicide attempts (30-40% of trans people attempt suicide before their 18th birthday, if I recall).