The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency

[Buffalo_Gal]

49 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 I thought the one yesterday was going to be a one-off. But nope. They're really going to try to make this stick: 

 

The meltdown is better than I could have ever hoped.  

That is nuts!

Some people are speculating something is coming down the pike tomorrow as this week has been even nuttier than usual. Who knows though, crazy seems to be the new normal for many with the "#resistance" these days.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

That is nuts!

Some people are speculating something is coming down the pike tomorrow as this week has been even nuttier than usual. Who knows though, crazy seems to be the new normal for many with the "#resistance" these days.

 

Agree with that assessment. It feels like something today is going to pop - but tomorrow makes sense too.

 

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

The meltdown is better than I could have ever hoped.  

 

It's truly the gift that keeps on giving. You'd think the left would be content to let the right swing with an idiot like Jones, but instead they're looking at that idiocy and their best response is "Hold my beer."

 

Delicious and wonderful and you have to give it up to Trump for trolling the snotschitt out of all of them.

[B-Man]

[row_33]

its the butt hurt that keeps on making us laugh, even well into 2018

 

 

[Kemp]

[4merper4mer]

19 hours ago, Tiberius said:

This is why Trump and Kim have been meeting! 

 

 

Wait a minute.  Is this true?  Geez poor Russ Brandon never stood a chance.

[Kemp]

18 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

What? How could that be? It's not as if the media has been pushing an agenda, facts be damned...

 

 

Oh... wait...

 

*****************

 

Chris can't win this fight: 

 

 

Remember what The Federalist used to say about Trump?

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/24/10-things-trump-said-but-says-he-didnt/

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Kemp said:

 

Remember what The Federalist used to say about Trump?

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/24/10-things-trump-said-but-says-he-didnt/

 

Mark Rubio as "Mark Zuckerberg's personal senator" is pretty good, though... 

[Deranged Rhino]

4 hours ago, Kemp said:

 

Remember what The Federalist used to say about Trump?

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/24/10-things-trump-said-but-says-he-didnt/

 

With respect, I think you're missing the point of the article posted. It's not about the Federalist (remember: it's the story, the journalist, and the outlet), it's about a pattern of deceit that's been evident for over a year. Not one, not two, not three, but multiple major media outlets for months have told the public Mueller had captured calls between Manafort and Russians. It was used as a talking point to hammer POTUS and Manafort both, to poison the mind of the public by painting the picture of Manafort having clandestine calls with Russians about the campaign. It's been a piece of "evidence" cited by many drive-by posters down here for over a year to show that the collusion story is more than a disinformation campaign engineered by our own IC. 

 

Now we're learning that's not true... Months after the story has been repeated to the point of being an accepted "fact" by those folk who only get their news and information from headlines (which is a large chunk of people). 

 

Doesn't that make you question all the other "facts" you (the general you, not you specifically, Kemp) have heard and accepted as true from reporters citing "unnamed sources" close to Mueller or his team? Throw this on the pile of other now proven falsehoods from the men behind the story's origin - Comey, McCabe, Brennan, and Clapper - and it fits a larger pattern of deceit by major players in the media who, at the urging of the IC, have been pushing an unsubstantiated story after unsubstantiated story designed to undercut (at best) or unseat (at worst) a legally elected POTUS.

 

Not because the collusion is real, but because what POTUS represents is a direct threat to their bottom lines and agendas... These aren't paragons of virtue - Clapper is a proven perjurer. Brennan is a proven perjurer. Both men played a role in some of the darkest chapters in CIA and NSA history. Both men have committed crimes to feather their own nests, at the expense of the people and constitution they swore to defend and uphold. But we are now supposed to take them at their word because Trump is rude, uncouth, and abrasive? 

 

Put your feelings about 45 aside for a moment and ask yourself if you're comfortable letting the IC dictate who the people can, and cannot have, as POTUS. We either live in a republic where the people have a say in their leadership - or we don't. 

 

The entire "Russian collusion" narrative was began by people who do not want you to have a say in the matter. They think you're stupid, dangerous, and not to be trusted with a vote. So much so they are willing to execute what can only be defined as a palace coup to make things the way they think they should be.

 

That should alarm anyone, regardless of partisanship. 

[Tiberius]

Manafort had many, many connections to Russia, working for Putin's puppet in Ukraine before the people woke up and threw them out. That should sound the alarm for anyone, regardless of how far out Trump's fat ass they were 

[Deranged Rhino]

Manafort (and TONY PODESTA) had many, many connections to Russia, working for Putin's puppet in the Ukraine before the people woke up and threw them out. 

 

(Fixed it for you)

 

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Manafort (and TONY PODESTA) had many, many connections to Russia, working for Putin's puppet in the Ukraine before the people woke up and threw them out. 

 

(Fixed it for you)

 

Podesta. That name sounds so familiar. Hmmm, seems like it is connected to some politicians and despicable sexual allegations. I guess sooner or later I'll figure it out.

[Kemp]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

With respect, I think you're missing the point of the article posted. It's not about the Federalist (remember: it's the story, the journalist, and the outlet), it's about a pattern of deceit that's been evident for over a year. Not one, not two, not three, but multiple major media outlets for months have told the public Mueller had captured calls between Manafort and Russians. It was used as a talking point to hammer POTUS and Manafort both, to poison the mind of the public by painting the picture of Manafort having clandestine calls with Russians about the campaign. It's been a piece of "evidence" cited by many drive-by posters down here for over a year to show that the collusion story is more than a disinformation campaign engineered by our own IC. 

 

Now we're learning that's not true... Months after the story has been repeated to the point of being an accepted "fact" by those folk who only get their news and information from headlines (which is a large chunk of people). 

 

Doesn't that make you question all the other "facts" you (the general you, not you specifically, Kemp) have heard and accepted as true from reporters citing "unnamed sources" close to Mueller or his team? Throw this on the pile of other now proven falsehoods from the men behind the story's origin - Comey, McCabe, Brennan, and Clapper - and it fits a larger pattern of deceit by major players in the media who, at the urging of the IC, have been pushing an unsubstantiated story after unsubstantiated story designed to undercut (at best) or unseat (at worst) a legally elected POTUS.

 

Not because the collusion is real, but because what POTUS represents is a direct threat to their bottom lines and agendas... These aren't paragons of virtue - Clapper is a proven perjurer. Brennan is a proven perjurer. Both men played a role in some of the darkest chapters in CIA and NSA history. Both men have committed crimes to feather their own nests, at the expense of the people and constitution they swore to defend and uphold. But we are now supposed to take them at their word because Trump is rude, uncouth, and abrasive? 

 

Put your feelings about 45 aside for a moment and ask yourself if you're comfortable letting the IC dictate who the people can, and cannot have, as POTUS. We either live in a republic where the people have a say in their leadership - or we don't. 

 

The entire "Russian collusion" narrative was began by people who do not want you to have a say in the matter. They think you're stupid, dangerous, and not to be trusted with a vote. So much so they are willing to execute what can only be defined as a palace coup to make things the way they think they should be.

 

That should alarm anyone, regardless of partisanship. 

 

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day (that is  verifiable fact, not an opinion) it's difficult to take the rest of this seriously. 

Until the investigation is complete, we can't be certain of much, other than some involved have already pleaded guilty to various crimes. So far we know this about Manafort's supposed role in all of the this: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/report-former-trump-chair-paul-manafort-and-partner-told-to-surrender/544331/.

Why the desire from some to shut it down if there were no crimes committed? 

 

As to where this investigation may head, one need look no further than the Clinton investigation that concluded in an impeachment based on nothing related to the original investigation. We have watched this process before, but this time it's not fair to do it the same way?

 

When one side opens a door, it shouldn't surprise when the other side uses the same door.

 

Trump and his supporters claimed they wanted to drain the swamp, so let's proceed and see exactly what's in this swamp..

[Keukasmallie]

Trump is a world class doofus; yet he has provided the voters of this country a great service by further exposing the overwhelming bias of the media, shedding light on the refusal of the major political parties to exert a scintilla of energy toward uniting the nation, and by confirming for all, once again, that incumbent politicians need to be thrown out of office at least every six years.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Keukasmallie

[Doc Brown]

3 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day (that is  verifiable fact, not an opinion) it's difficult to take the rest of this seriously. 

Until the investigation is complete, we can't be certain of much, other than some involved have already pleaded guilty to various crimes. So far we know this about Manafort's supposed role in all of the this: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/report-former-trump-chair-paul-manafort-and-partner-told-to-surrender/544331/.

Why the desire from some to shut it down if there were no crimes committed? 

 

As to where this investigation may head, one need look no further than the Clinton investigation that concluded in an impeachment based on nothing related to the original investigation. We have watched this process before, but this time it's not fair to do it the same way?

 

When one side opens a door, it shouldn't surprise when the other side uses the same door.

 

Trump and his supporters claimed they wanted to drain the swamp, so let's proceed and see exactly what's in this swamp..

It wasn't fair in the 90's as that whole charade by the Republicans back then was just ridiculous.  I hear Newt Gingrich whine about the Special Counsel today and it reminds me of why I hate politicians.  The thing with Trump is anybody with half a brain knows that he's always been a pathological liar and a womanizer, but we elected him anyways.  That's why this Stormy Daniels thing won't hurt him in the slightest.

[row_33]

Trump was seen as the better alternative to a voting public that already knew all about him

 

keep smashing your heads against a tree acting shocked and all, it won’t matter

 

 

 

[Cinga]

1 hour ago, Kemp said:

 

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day (that is  verifiable fact, not an opinion) it's difficult to take the rest of this seriously. 

Until the investigation is complete, we can't be certain of much, other than some involved have already pleaded guilty to various crimes. So far we know this about Manafort's supposed role in all of the this: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/report-former-trump-chair-paul-manafort-and-partner-told-to-surrender/544331/.

Why the desire from some to shut it down if there were no crimes committed? 

 

As to where this investigation may head, one need look no further than the Clinton investigation that concluded in an impeachment based on nothing related to the original investigation. We have watched this process before, but this time it's not fair to do it the same way?

 

When one side opens a door, it shouldn't surprise when the other side uses the same door.

 

Trump and his supporters claimed they wanted to drain the swamp, so let's proceed and see exactly what's in this swamp..

 

2 parts...

first one. Please elaborate. I'm sick and tires of reading this line. Give me a list please, heck, I'll settle for a list of his lies just every day this week

Second, totally different situations. Affair aside, no one gave a crap about that. Clinton committed perjury. You know, lied under oath. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 hour ago, Kemp said:

 

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day (that is  verifiable fact, not an opinion) it's difficult to take the rest of this seriously. 

Until the investigation is complete, we can't be certain of much, other than some involved have already pleaded guilty to various crimes. So far we know this about Manafort's supposed role in all of the this: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/report-former-trump-chair-paul-manafort-and-partner-told-to-surrender/544331/.

Why the desire from some to shut it down if there were no crimes committed? 

 

As to where this investigation may head, one need look no further than the Clinton investigation that concluded in an impeachment based on nothing related to the original investigation. We have watched this process before, but this time it's not fair to do it the same way?

 

When one side opens a door, it shouldn't surprise when the other side uses the same door.

 

Trump and his supporters claimed they wanted to drain the swamp, so let's proceed and see exactly what's in this swamp..

 

Oh look! It's another deluded democrat.

 

Two years on, STILL no proof of russian collusion. When do you give up? Edit: can't wait till we put the next democrat under investigation.

CAN NOT WAIT.

 

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by joesixpack

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Kemp said:

 

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day

 

You're new here, so I'll explain it again: Trump doesn't lie.  "Lies" are falsehoods...in being so, they have a connection to the truth.  A completely negative connection, but still, a connection.

 

Nothing Trump says has any connection to the truth.  He lives in his very own little world of "East Trumpistan." where he issues statements and tweets that have no bearing on anything in reality, including previous statements and tweets.  He well and truly believe the bull **** he's spewing at the time he spews it, even if it contradicts what he spewed yesterday, which he also believed at the time he spewed it.  He may actually be the most honest politician in the history of the nation, for being too irretrievably stupid to lie.  

 

That is no more "lying" than my five-year old niece is lying when she says there's monsters under the bet.  It's bloviating from a position of extreme ignorance, stupidity, and unreality.  But that isn't lying.

9 minutes ago, Cinga said:

Second, totally different situations. Affair aside, no one gave a crap about that. Clinton committed perjury. You know, lied under oath. 

 

Which still wasn't related to the original investigation.

 

Can anyone explain how Monica Lewinsky relates to Whitewater?

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

You're new here, so I'll explain it again: Trump doesn't lie.  "Lies" are falsehoods...in being so, they have a connection to the truth.  A completely negative connection, but still, a connection.

 

Nothing Trump says has any connection to the truth.  He lives in his very own little world of "East Trumpistan." where he issues statements and tweets that have no bearing on anything in reality, including previous statements and tweets.  He well and truly believe the bull **** he's spewing at the time he spews it, even if it contradicts what he spewed yesterday, which he also believed at the time he spewed it.  He may actually be the most honest politician in the history of the nation, for being too irretrievably stupid to lie.  

 

That is no more "lying" than my five-year old niece is lying when she says there's monsters under the bet.  It's bloviating from a position of extreme ignorance, stupidity, and unreality.  But that isn't lying.

And with all his faults he's getting shitdone.

[Cinga]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Which still wasn't related to the original investigation.

 

Can anyone explain how Monica Lewinsky relates to Whitewater?

I didn't say i agreed with that investigation either and in fact think we should maybe remove the SC from Washington lexicon.

 

As for Lewinsky and Whitewater.... Are you dense?

 

Water is blue, so was the dress!!!!

[Kemp]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

It wasn't fair in the 90's as that whole charade by the Republicans back then was just ridiculous.  I hear Newt Gingrich whine about the Special Counsel today and it reminds me of why I hate politicians.  The thing with Trump is anybody with half a brain knows that he's always been a pathological liar and a womanizer, but we elected him anyways.  That's why this Stormy Daniels thing won't hurt him in the slightest.

 

When all is said and done, the Stormy Daniels saga will be an afterthought. 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, Kemp said:

 

When you're saying one side is being consistently deceitful and the other side is Trump and his propensity to lie every single day (that is  verifiable fact, not an opinion) it's difficult to take the rest of this seriously. 

Until the investigation is complete, we can't be certain of much, other than some involved have already pleaded guilty to various crimes. So far we know this about Manafort's supposed role in all of the this: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/report-former-trump-chair-paul-manafort-and-partner-told-to-surrender/544331/.

Why the desire from some to shut it down if there were no crimes committed? 

 

As to where this investigation may head, one need look no further than the Clinton investigation that concluded in an impeachment based on nothing related to the original investigation. We have watched this process before, but this time it's not fair to do it the same way?

 

When one side opens a door, it shouldn't surprise when the other side uses the same door.

 

Trump and his supporters claimed they wanted to drain the swamp, so let's proceed and see exactly what's in this swamp..

 

1. I never said one side is being deceitful while the other is not. I said one side is being fed disinformation by the IC in an attempt to execute a palace coup. That's a major difference. 

 

2. I've never called for Mueller's investigation to be ended early. But there is PLENTY we can be certain of about the investigation, its merit, its purpose, and what its uncovered so far. I've been doing exactly that for a number of months here, dealing with the primary source material available to us. 

 

3. You completely avoided the crux of my question. Why are you now trusting the very same people who are proven liars (Clapper and Brennan) to be truthful? We have evidence (not opinion or rumor) that the IC is behind much of this story, much of the "unnamed sources", and we have evidence (not rumor or opinion) that it's politically motivated. Doesn't it alarm you to see the most powerful branches of the IC abusing their powers to undermine a legitimate election of a POTUS? Or are you comfortable with the Intelligence Community choosing our president for us? 

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[Kemp]

26 minutes ago, Cinga said:

 

2 parts...

first one. Please elaborate. I'm sick and tires of reading this line. Give me a list please, heck, I'll settle for a list of his lies just every day this week

Second, totally different situations. Affair aside, no one gave a crap about that. Clinton committed perjury. You know, lied under oath. 

 

1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html

2. No one gives a crap about Trump's sexual exploits, either.

[Cinga]

1 minute ago, Kemp said:

 

1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html

2. No one gives a crap about Trump's sexual exploits, either.

that is an opinion piece.... just like your post, can't you do better?

[Kemp]

25 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Oh look! It's another deluded democrat.

 

Two years on, STILL no proof of russian collusion. When do you give up? Edit: can't wait till we put the next democrat under investigation.

CAN NOT WAIT.

 

 

 

There is usually not proof of anything revealed to the public in a criminal prosecution until the case is presented. I have no idea if there was collusion. The only thing we know is that an attempt at collusion was made. We don't know whether it was successful. There is no law against collusion, anyway.

In either case, this will most likely become a money-laundering prosecution. 

We'll all have to wait to see how it plays out

25 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You're new here, so I'll explain it again: Trump doesn't lie.  "Lies" are falsehoods...in being so, they have a connection to the truth.  A completely negative connection, but still, a connection.

 

Nothing Trump says has any connection to the truth.  He lives in his very own little world of "East Trumpistan." where he issues statements and tweets that have no bearing on anything in reality, including previous statements and tweets.  He well and truly believe the bull **** he's spewing at the time he spews it, even if it contradicts what he spewed yesterday, which he also believed at the time he spewed it.  He may actually be the most honest politician in the history of the nation, for being too irretrievably stupid to lie.  

 

That is no more "lying" than my five-year old niece is lying when she says there's monsters under the bet.  It's bloviating from a position of extreme ignorance, stupidity, and unreality.  But that isn't lying.

 

Which still wasn't related to the original investigation.

 

Can anyone explain how Monica Lewinsky relates to Whitewater?

 

Preparing an insanity defense.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

Good points made by Alan - the head-shaking and blank look on the other guy's face is hilarious, especially in light of what came out after this interview aired (that the wiretapping story was wrong). 

 

 

[Kemp]

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

1. I never said one side is being deceitful while the other is not. I said one side is being fed disinformation by the IC in an attempt to execute a palace coup. That's a major difference. 

 

2. I've never called for Mueller's investigation to be ended early. But there is PLENTY we can be certain of about the investigation, its merit, its purpose, and what its uncovered so far. I've been doing exactly that for a number of months here, dealing with the primary source material available to us. 

 

3. You completely avoided the crux of my question. Why are you now trusting the very same people who are proven liars (Clapper and Brennan) to be truthful? We have evidence (not opinion or rumor) that the IC is behind much of this story, much of the "unnamed sources", and we have evidence (not rumor or opinion) that it's politically motivated. Doesn't it alarm you to see the most powerful branches of the IC abusing their powers to undermine a legitimate election of a POTUS? Or are you comfortable with the Intelligence Community choosing our president for us? 

 

 

Everyone on the planet lies to some degree and while Clapper and Brennan most certainly lie, what we are currently experiencing in terms of the amount of lying by the folks  in power is unprecedented.

 

You can't possibly know who and what is behind any of this. None of us do.

 

Eventually we will find out. Hopefully.

 

If it turns out that Trump is guilty of very serious crimes, my fear is that it won't matter to many, because of the narrative being pushed from the top. If that scenario takes place, we are done.

 

If he is exonerated, he will end up the most maligned man in American history, and his supporters will endlessly tell us that, and deservedly so.

 

It's wait and see time. It's not time to say there is nothing to see here. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

12 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

There is no law against collusion, anyway.

 

 

So if collusion's not a crime, why does Mueller have a job at this point?

 

Oh, that's right. He's acting on behest of his overlords, the Clintons and Hussein.

 

[Kemp]

16 minutes ago, Cinga said:

that is an opinion piece.... just like your post, can't you do better?

 

T or F? JAN. 21 “I wasn't a fan of Iraq. I didn't want to go into Iraq.” (He was for an invasion before he was against it.) 

T or F?  JAN. 23 “Between 3 million and 5 million illegal votes caused me to lose the popular vote.” (There's no evidence of illegal voting.)

T or F? JAN. 25 “Take a look at the Pew reports (which show voter fraud.)” (The report never mentioned voter fraud.)

T or F? JAN. 25 “So, look, when President Obama was there two weeks ago making a speech, very nice speech. Two people were shot and killed during his speech. You can't have that.” (There were no gun homicide victims in Chicago that day.)

 

I can post enough of these lies to fill up pages, here. Want to dispute any of these, for starters?

 

He makes things up out of ether. The funny thing is you know this to be true.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Kemp said:

 

Everyone on the planet lies to some degree and while Clapper and Brennan most certainly lie, what we are currently experiencing in terms of the amount of lying by the folks  in power is unprecedented.

 

Again, this isn't in dispute. I'm not saying Trump never lies and the other side does. I didn't vote for Trump. I was never a Trump guy... 

 

What I am saying is that there is evidence - not rumor or opinion - that the IC overstepped its mandate not to protect the country from Russian election meddling, but to meddle in the election themselves. There's a paper trail making this clear, and a trail of fired/demoted/reassigned DOJ/FBI officials to underline it. 

 

This isn't about Clapper and Brennan lying. It's about them deciding that the people of the United States don't get to pick their leader. That should bother anyone, regardless of their politics and regardless of your or my opinion on Trump, no? 

 

4 minutes ago, Kemp said:

You can't possibly know who and what is behind any of this. None of us do.

 

 

There's an awful lot you can discern if you're willing to dig through the information yourself rather than outsource it to news anchors and papers. That's what I've been doing for over a year, and respectfully, there's been a ton that's been uncovered right here on this site months before it was in the news. 

 

What my investigation has uncovered is chilling. A deliberate attempt by members of the USIC to overthrow a sitting, legally elected POTUS. I have strong enough evidence to make this case in a court of law. Do I know everything? Of course not. There's much left we don't know, but one thing we absolutely know for sure is that this whole thing started in the FBI CID, not in Moscow or in the Trump campaign. 

 

Members of the FBI CID were allowing subcontractors to illegally use raw NSA 702 data to do opposition research on political opponents for years. This is proven, beyond a doubt, in the FISC opinion written last year and made public by DNI Coats in April: 

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf

 

If you read that document - which major media outlets have ignored for over a year now because they think the public is too stupid to understand it (and it's damning to their narrative) - lays out the origins of this whole plot. It has nothing to do with Russians and everything to do with Admiral Mike Rogers catching FBI contractors with their hands in the cookie jar. 

 

Do we know for certain who those subcontractors were? Nope. Their names are redacted. But digging on your own, and my own contacts and research have led me to believe that Fusion GPS, CrowdStrike and (possibly) more were among those contractors abusing this system. 

 

You cannot understand the Russian narrative without understanding this document and what it's laying out. The entire media, with the exception of a few independent journalists, have ignored it... and in the process have turned their noses up at the biggest political scandal in US history. 

 

And I bet dollars to doughnuts you've never heard of this document... am I right?

 

10 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

If it turns out that Trump is guilty of very serious crimes, my fear is that it won't matter to many, because of the narrative being pushed from the top. If that scenario takes place, we are done.

 

If he is exonerated, he will end up the most maligned man in American history, and his supporters will endlessly tell us that, and deservedly so.

 

It's wait and see time. It's not time to say there is nothing to see here. 

 

Again, I've never said there's nothing to see here. I've been loudly in favor of finding out if there's any "there there", and if there is, to hold those accountable. 

 

What I have asked (twice now) and what you've continued to avoid answering, is whether you think it's the place of the USIC to interfere in our domestic elections because they don't like the winner? Or do you find that precedent problematic? 

[gatorbait]

27 minutes ago, Cinga said:

that is an opinion piece.... just like your post, can't you do better?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/05/01/president-trump-has-made-3001-false-or-misleading-claims-so-far/?utm_term=.b9dd602272fc

[Kemp]

8 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

So if collusion's not a crime, why does Mueller have a job at this point?

 

Oh, that's right. He's acting on behest of his overlords, the Clintons and Hussein.

 

 

You really don't get it, do you?

 

The crime isn't called "collusion", but collusion can be an umbrella for a host of felonies.

[njbuff]

10 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

So if collusion's not a crime, why does Mueller have a job at this point?

 

Oh, that's right. He's acting on behest of his overlords, the Clintons and Hussein.

 

 

This investigation goes far beyond Russian collusion.

 

Mueller is ordered by the destructive Democrats to get Trump on ANYTHING.

 

Democrats have been proven to be the most disgusting people on the planet.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Kemp said:

 

You really don't get it, do you?

 

The crime isn't called "collusion", but collusion can be an umbrella for a host of felonies.

 

While we both admit we don't know what Mueller has found, do you believe right now where we sit today that Trump actively colluded with the Russians to tip the election in his favor? And if you believe that, do you think any votes were actively altered by their efforts? 

 

I ask the above, Kemp, simply because I don't know your position. I should ask that before we dig in:)  

[Kemp]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Again, this isn't in dispute. I'm not saying Trump never lies and the other side does. I didn't vote for Trump. I was never a Trump guy... 

 

What I am saying is that there is evidence - not rumor or opinion - that the IC overstepped its mandate not to protect the country from Russian election meddling, but to meddle in the election themselves. There's a paper trail making this clear, and a trail of fired/demoted/reassigned DOJ/FBI officials to underline it. 

 

This isn't about Clapper and Brennan lying. It's about them deciding that the people of the United States don't get to pick their leader. That should bother anyone, regardless of their politics and regardless of your or my opinion on Trump, no? 

 

 

 

There's an awful lot you can discern if you're willing to dig through the information yourself rather than outsource it to news anchors and papers. That's what I've been doing for over a year, and respectfully, there's been a ton that's been uncovered right here on this site months before it was in the news. 

 

What my investigation has uncovered is chilling. A deliberate attempt by members of the USIC to overthrow a sitting, legally elected POTUS. I have strong enough evidence to make this case in a court of law. Do I know everything? Of course not. There's much left we don't know, but one thing we absolutely know for sure is that this whole thing started in the FBI CID, not in Moscow or in the Trump campaign. 

 

Members of the FBI CID were allowing subcontractors to illegally use raw NSA 702 data to do opposition research on political opponents for years. This is proven, beyond a doubt, in the FISC opinion written last year and made public by DNI Coats in April: 

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/icotr/51117/2016_Cert_FISC_Memo_Opin_Order_Apr_2017.pdf

 

If you read that document - which major media outlets have ignored for over a year now because they think the public is too stupid to understand it (and it's damning to their narrative) - lays out the origins of this whole plot. It has nothing to do with Russians and everything to do with Admiral Mike Rogers catching FBI contractors with their hands in the cookie jar. 

 

Do we know for certain who those subcontractors were? Nope. Their names are redacted. But digging on your own, and my own contacts and research have led me to believe that Fusion GPS, CrowdStrike and (possibly) more were among those contractors abusing this system. 

 

You cannot understand the Russian narrative without understanding this document and what it's laying out. The entire media, with the exception of a few independent journalists, have ignored it... and in the process have turned their noses up at the biggest political scandal in US history. 

 

And I bet dollars to doughnuts you've never heard of this document... am I right?

 

 

Again, I've never said there's nothing to see here. I've been loudly in favor of finding out if there's any "there there", and if there is, to hold those accountable. 

 

What I have asked (twice now) and what you've continued to avoid answering, is whether you think it's the place of the USIC to interfere in our domestic elections because they don't like the winner? Or do you find that precedent problematic? 

 

That's fair.

 

I have no idea as to who did what illegally, here, but the notion that you have better info than Trump supporters in power doesn't ring true to me, and we know if they had what you say you have, it would bump Trump off of the front pages.

 

Let's assume you are right. If you have access to this proof, it will come out from better connected people than yourself.

 

Again, all we can do is watch this play out. Granted, we don't always find out all truths, but even though our system sucks, it's still better than some others. It's also far more corrupt than most people understand or are willing to admit.

 

I still think we are better off with a corrupt system than with an even more corrupt system, headed by a pathological liar/criminal.

7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

While we both admit we don't know what Mueller has found, do you believe right now where we sit today that Trump actively colluded with the Russians to tip the election in his favor? And if you believe that, do you think any votes were actively altered by their efforts? 

 

I ask the above, Kemp, simply because I don't know your position. I should ask that before we dig in:)  

 

I know he TRIED to collude. I don't know whether he was successful. My guess would be yes because of what we know about Stone and Manafort.

 

No idea if votes were altered, but it is believed that some states had attempts to break into their systems. I also believe that even if we KNEW that votes were tampered with that we would not be told because it would cause utter chaos and a possible civil war.

 

That Trump and the Republicans absolutely refuse to try and increase security for the next election seems damning to me, though.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Kemp said:

 

That's fair.

 

I have no idea as to who did what illegally, here, but the notion that you have better info than Trump supporters in power doesn't ring true to me, and we know if they had what you say you have, it would bump Trump off of the front pages.

 

I'm not trying to be pedantic or argumentative - nor am I trying to convince you Trump isn't who you think he is. (for the record)

 

But I point out the following for you to consider as the weeks roll on... I'm not at all trying to say I have more information than the President or Mueller. At all. But, if what I am laying out has any truth to it (and you don't seem to be familiar with my theory, which is fine - I only say that because I've been short-handing it assuming you were aware), then it's very possible, if not probable, there are other games afoot. 

 

Trump wants to be on the front page, every day. That's his narcissism, his ego, his drive. Good or bad, he doesn't care so long as you're talking about him. None of this stuff is sticking to him, his numbers are going up, and he's still been able to work on other issues (North Korea, Iran, Tax cuts etc). This is strategic distraction... not to protect Trump, but to protect the other investigations going on in the DOJ. 

The ones no one knew about for months and months until the OIG report started being talked about openly. 

 

[DC Tom]

24 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

T or F? JAN. 21 “I wasn't a fan of Iraq. I didn't want to go into Iraq.” (He was for an invasion before he was against it.) 

T or F?  JAN. 23 “Between 3 million and 5 million illegal votes caused me to lose the popular vote.” (There's no evidence of illegal voting.)

T or F? JAN. 25 “Take a look at the Pew reports (which show voter fraud.)” (The report never mentioned voter fraud.)

T or F? JAN. 25 “So, look, when President Obama was there two weeks ago making a speech, very nice speech. Two people were shot and killed during his speech. You can't have that.” (There were no gun homicide victims in Chicago that day.)

 

I can post enough of these lies to fill up pages, here. Want to dispute any of these, for starters?

 

He makes things up out of ether. The funny thing is you know this to be true.

 

 

You can play that game all day with anyone.  It's a bull **** argument.

[Kemp]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

You can play that game all day with anyone.  It's a bull **** argument.

 

Truth and facts are bull****?

 

Orwellian times.

 

This probably is reasonable thought to you:

 

"I was provided with additional input that was radically different from the truth. I assisted in furthering that version." -Colonel Oliver North, from his Iran-Contra testimony"