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

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Options
1…686687689691692…1190

Comments

  • Options
    #20642
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,411 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120606752#Comment_120606752

    Indeed.

    No predicate. Trump pressured Barr to open an investigation.

    Durham also announced a preliminary finding at a time which was politically convenient.



  • Options
    #20643
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,523 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    This looks like an excellent summary of the Durham report:

    https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1658455372116393986.html


    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #20644
    Burty330
    Registered Users Posts: 962 ✭✭✭Burty330


    https://twitter.com/BarbMcQuade/status/1658455412536930304?cxt=HHwWgMCzwaWagoQuAAAA


    The old Mark Twain quote its easier to fool someone than to convince them they've been fooled has never be truer.

    Also "bipartisan investigation" is an oxymoron.

    https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1658640121099431936?cxt=HHwWgMC9xd-Z1oQuAAAA




  • Options
    #20645
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,411 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607109#Comment_120607109

    I'm sorry - what are you trying to say?

    Do you think Russia's preferred candidate wasn't Trump?

    Where on p118 of the report does it say what that second tweet says?



  • Options
    #20646
    MisterAnarchy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,705 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120606853#Comment_120606853

    No thanks, she isnt an objective person.

    Sacked by Trump in 2017, an analyst for MSNBC since 2017 "In 2017, McQuade became a regular contributor to MSNBC, initially commenting primarily on purported scandals related to President Donald Trump"

    Im sure she is going to be objective.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #20647
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607109#Comment_120607109

    Once again , a selective "interpretation" of a quote from the Durham report to make it sound like there was something illegal going on.

    The full quote from page 118 says this.

    On October 3, 2016, Special Agent-2, Acting Section Chief-I, and SIA Brian Auten traveled to Rome, Italy to meet with Handling Agent-I and Steele. During this meeting, the interviewers informed Steele, in sum, that the FBI might be willing to pay Steele in excess of $1,000,000 if he could provide corroborating evidence of the allegations contained in his reporting.

    So - IF he could prove the details in his earlier report and provide corroboration , they might pay him for the information.

    That is not anything remotely the same as "The FBI offered him a million dollars for dirt on Trump!!"

    Selectively re-imagining information from the report to try and make it seem like they found something illegal when they absolutely failed to find anything serves absolutely no purpose other than to enrage people that are already in the bag for Trump.

    Should you actually be bothered the full Durham report is available here , but given that you barely read the tweets you link to , I'm not holding out on you reading a several hundred page report.



  • Options
    #20648
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,523 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607192#Comment_120607192

    Spare me. You've been dumping links from Trumpster cranks non-stop and now you expect me to believe that you care about objectivity?

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #20649
    MisterAnarchy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,705 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607221#Comment_120607221

    Your post from yesterday "Well, how about some evidence instead of a tweet dump from an online disinformation factory?"

    Pot calling the kettle black, anytime I post something thats the default argument, the source isnt objective.



  • Options
    #20650
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,523 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607233#Comment_120607233

    You've been regularly dumping absolute twaddle here that you've not even bothered to read. What response are you expecting?

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #20651
    randd1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭randd1


    It's amazing how devoted MAGA heads are devoted to the cult. Their minds are no longer their own. If a non-Trumpanzee said water is wet, they'd argue it's dry, simply because the other person is a non-Trumpanzee like themselves. They simply cannot accept fact or reason, and can't be debated as they simply parrot Trumpist blather.

    David Koresh or Jim Jones couldn't have done a better job is taking over people's minds.

    Let's hope Trump doesn't provide his acolytes with the same fate.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #20652
    MisterAnarchy
    Registered Users Posts: 14,705 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607242#Comment_120607242

    How do you know I havent read the things I have posted, I didnt realise mind reading had been perfected yet.

    What response are you expecting ?

    Exactly what I expected



  • Options
    #20653
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,523 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607328#Comment_120607328

    It's been demonstrated clearly above when other posters have dismantled your dumps.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #20654
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120605173#Comment_120605173

    Jake Tapper? Really? Well, if Jake Tapper says something, I guess I should just believe it without question.



  • Options
    #20655
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,411 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607192#Comment_120607192

    Citing Tapper's opinion is perfectly fine. Opinions are just that. Objectivity is in play there.


    However, McQuade posted a detail analysis and set out facts in the matter.

    Regardless of who said it, you should be able to argue on the facts.

    So, that being said, which facts do you disagree with?



  • Options
    #20656
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,593 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    But the Durham report doesn't actually prove anything does it? Throughout the Mueller investigation, and after it, Trump supporters continually called the entire investigation biased, a claim that could certainly be made about this investigation, and then when the report was produced brushed it off as nobody was actually indicted directly from it.

    Isn't that exactly the same in this report? So why is this report being given more credibility than Mueller?



  • Options
    #20657
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,604 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    The simple and inescapable fact is that; this was the investigation into the items raised in the report. The report is the findings of those investigations, and Durham found nothing to warrant further investigations or charges. Some procedural changes in the FBI to prevent same happening again.

    Durham's report is based on the four-year investigation into all the claims raised about the Steele Dossier, Clinton campaign, FBI etc. And there was nothing found in the investigation which is likely to lead to further charges (I think one FBI agent was found guilty of manipulating/changing language in some intel or something like that).

    There's no point taking snippets from the Durham Report to try and act like there should be an investigation or charges brought. The report is the result of those very investigations. The investigations have already happened. That's what the report is.



  • Options
    #20658
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,278 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607328#Comment_120607328

    How do we know? Because when you're presented with contradicting facts or points within that dump you obfuscate and distract rather than discuss those points. It's as if you don't read beyond the headlines nor understand what you're posting



  • Options
    #20659
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,411 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Trump - we must investigate the investigators

    Durham - yeah, no laws broken.

    GOP - let's invent laws!

    https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/status/1658643601629368321?s=20




  • Options
    #20660
    Burty330
    Registered Users Posts: 962 ✭✭✭Burty330


    The Russian collusion accusations hyperinflated by the fbi, which fulled the first impeachment and was peddled incessantly by leftwing media was all a corordianated effort to oust Trump from office. That's called seditious conspiracy. Ray Charles can see the democrats are above the law and will never be held accountable. You either see that reality or you don't. And if you do you're either honest about it or your not.



  • Options
    #20661
    Smee_Again
    Registered Users Posts: 2,033 ✭✭✭Smee_Again


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    Where's the proof? Durham had years to prove these allegations and came up with even less than Trump's Healthcare Plan.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #20662
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    Trump calls so many things "HOAX!!!" that even his supporters can't keep them all straight.

    The 1st Indictment was about his attempts to extort Ukraine in order to discredit Joe Biden, absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the categorically proven Russian Interference in the 2016 Elections.

    The ONLY people convicted of seditious conspiracy in the US in the last several hundred years are Trump supporters for their actions surrounding January 6th.

    If the Democrats are guilty of all these things, why can't the GOP ever manage to find actual evidence of wrong-doing that could lead to convictions?

    Is it that the Democrats are so fantastically brilliant that they just can't be caught, but obviously not quite brilliant enough to win the 2016 Election or to keep the House in 2020??

    Or , are the GOP just so cripplingly incompetent that despite all the resources at their disposal that cannot manage to find a shred of evidence?

    OR - Maybe , now just hear me out here....

    There is no evidence because none of the things the GOP claim actually happened??



  • Options
    #20663
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,278 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    The Durham report was an investigation instigated by trump to hold the Democrats accountable (as you want), unfortunately (for your storyline) no one was found criminally liable. So dry your tears



  • Options
    #20664
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    Why would the head of the FBI publicly single out Clinton about her emails just before the election if they were in cahoots? Your post makes no sense when reality is taken into account.



  • Options
    #20665
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,523 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    Repeating the silly conspiracy theory just makes it look more absurd.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #20666
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,604 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    Whether we see it or not doesn't matter. It was investigated, by a Trump appointee, on Trump's orders, for four years.

    The special counsel, John Durham, didn't see "that reality". Yes, he determined the FBI were too quick to jump to a full investigation, and some of the basis of that decision was overplayed. But seditious conspiracy or a co-ordinated effort to oust Trump from office? That's not the reality that Durham's investigation found. It also doesn't negate the findings of Mueller's investigation or the numerous actual charges which did come from it either.



  • Options
    #20667
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607192#Comment_120607192

    But the people you follow who pay $8/mo for Twitter they’re objective? 🤡



  • Options
    #20668
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Another one of Trumps attorneys in the classified docs case in the spotlight, this time for abruptly exiting the case over “personal differences” following his clients own abject inability to shut the **** up about ongoing litigation ie. Take his professional advice. This comes after the town hall where Trump mouthed off about the case and gave prosecutors more to work with.

    https://www.mediaite.com/news/just-in-trump-classified-docs-attorney-quits-team-days-after-trump-pops-off-on-case-at-cnn-town-hall/




  • Options
    #20669
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,454 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120608563#Comment_120608563

    Maybe it's something in the Florida Air/Water as DeSantis can't seem to stop incriminating himself in the Disney lawsuit as well.

    Gave another Interview in recent days and again explicitly says "We decided to go after Disney when they spoke up about the "Don't say gay" legislation."

    "We" being the Florida legislature which makes it a slam dunk 1st Amendment win for Disney.



  • Options
    #20670
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,411 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    What alternative reality is this from

    What does "contrary to the authority thereof" mean to you? FBI, Congress, they have legal authorities.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #20671
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,411 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120607725#Comment_120607725

    Bi-partisan Senate committee..

    FwWEKu5XgAADp3Q.jpeg




This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement