It sounds like you’re the one with the blinders on, Zeb. You clearly haven’t looked into any of this as you’ve convinced yourself it’s all just a silly game. Surprising for someone who claims to be a “political junkie” and lived through Watergate.
Ha…I can see why that would be funny. But, honestly even though I am a republican I can still see when the games are being played on both sides. That’s all I meant Mufasa.
Hmm…There is evidence that Obama personally had Trump surveilled? I must have missed that. Can you provide a link?
Okay Tyler where’s the beef?
I will tell you where I think it is. It is in your mind and the minds of all the people who hate Trump and want him so very badly to be up to his orange hair in scandal. And that is why the game is played.
You see what you want to see…It is a human fault we all do…
Without looking anything up because I don’t care enough to do that. I think Trump said that Obama had me surveilled. So…the Obama team is listening to another party and picks up Trump as well. I’d say that’s close enough.
If I said that ED took my picture but it was actually a picture of your best friend and I was in the background would I still not be correct?
Don’t get me wrong this is a bunch of shit just like the Trump is in bed with the Russians nonsense…but it’s still worth noting
1 Like
What’s your point? You are claiming that Obama actually didn’t have Trump’s phone tapped? WOW no shit. That’s not the point is it?
It was an accusation made by Trump which I called bullcrap on as soon as he said it. BUT…in light of this new information Joe Six pack is quite happy with Trump’s answer that he has been “vindicated”.
And…now what?
More games…
It’s funny how people will debate back and forth until there is puke all over someone’s keyboard over this stuff. When all that matters…all that comes from these games is PERCEPTION.
Politics is all about perception right?
That’s how Trump convinced all of the middle state folks to vote for him. He was a big success a winner and he was going to make the country win again…Ha ha…Gamesmanship at its finest.
Nah. The only Joe Six Packs happy with this answer are those who were unshakable Trumpsters to begin with.
Could be but if you look at the demographics Trump’s supporters were mostly rural and Hillary won the large City vote. The country folk are willing to believe that Trump has been vindicated I would bet on that. You don’t want the guy you just voted for to be wrong. Human nature right? Just like you want Trump to fail because you backed Hillary. That’s politics.
I’d be willing to bet that most are not paying much attention they are not like you and I. They see something, or hear something and move on. Now they hear bla bla “vindicated”.
Like I said it doesn’t mean a nickels worth of spit if he doesn’t turn the economy around, build the wall and keep his other promises. If he does all that no one will care 3 years from now (when the Presidential election begins again) who said what about Russia or being wire tapped.
It’s a game until the next election. Try to damage the other party and their candidates. But in this case I don’t think either party gets anywhere with this nonsense.
But we shall see right?
Nice talking with you ED have a good evening.
1 Like
Thought this was interesting (I assume its actually accurate):
Long story short: there are very few data points about SCOTUS nominations this close to an election, but there is precedent for the senate not having a vote.
I’m curious what you would consider to be an ending you didn’t expect - you didn’t see coming? I have my own notions, but am curious what yours would be…
The buck stops at the top. The president is responsible for what his agencies do. Doesn’t matter if he’s ineffective and “found out about it on the news.”
So your stance is that there wasn’t a split between the republican congress and the Democrat prez? Because there is no doubt that the republicans would have confirmed a judge with a political bent they liked.
It was already well within my attention and you still didn’t answer the question.
I think you misunderstand me. I hate Trump and would love to see him impeached. However, this sounds like a pretty good circumstantial case against a person in the campaign. A - circumstantial and B - not directly linked to Trump. Even if Manfort was attempting to subvert US interest (something I haven’t seen direct evidence for) and that subversion continued into his duties in the campaign (something I also haven’t seen evidence for) it doesn’t mean Trump was in on it (something else I also don’t see evidence for).
Sorry, but that dog ain’t hunting. Trump didn’t say ‘the Obama admin tapped my phones.’ No, Trump was quite clear and specific–Obama personally had his (Trump’s) phones tapped. Even if we cut Trump some old-fogie slack on the ‘wiretap’ terminology, there is absolutely no evidence supporting his claim that “bad (or sick) guy!” Obama ordered anything.
Not sure why you feel the need to carry Trump’s water on such a loser of an issue.
Surely you’re not suggesting the GOP senate opposed Garland because they didn’t like him as a judge?
Your question is moot, on multiple fronts. First, the FBI investigation into her was concluded. Second, the investigation into her activities was not counter-intelligence in nature. Not all investigations are created equal.
1 Like
The Clinton foundation stuff is closed? You have to remember she was under multiple investigations. I thought the foundation stuff, which includes subverting US interests for personal gain while being a government official, were ongoing. But even the investigations that concluded came to damning conclusions. For the whole email sever thing, she lied to investigators, the public, and congress in an effort to cover up gross negligence with classified information.
Hell, she (her campaign) apparently even worked with Ukrainian intelligence to undermine Trump in a fashion eerily similar to the ties we see between Trump and Russia. Nor do we officially know that she isn’t under investigation for this or other stuff as it is standard policy not to release that information other than special circumstances.
I don’t recall the CF being the subject of a DOJ or national-security investigation.
Really? Because I recall she was cleared of all wrongdoing.
If she had lied, she would have been charged with perjury.
Yes, that is what the Trump people would have you believe. The evidence seems rather thin (to put it mildly).
By that logic, we don’t know if you aren’t under investigation either.