Idiocy. Comet was going to tell the truth regardless (this isn’t Comey’s first rodeo, and wouldn’t have done anything to be embarrassed about in a recording), and all Trump’s comments did was make the light shiner on him when he should want it to be dimmer.
These tweets are simply Trump clumsily trying to intimidate his detractors into being quiet. And they don’t work, and with every bluff, the eye rolls just get larger.
Ok now I’m convinced your lack of success with the ladies is keeping your brain from working properly.
I feel like from a strategic perspective, showing the entire planet that you’re always bluffing isn’t the best approach.
I guess we just don’t understand 4D chess, then.
Comey told the truth so it clearly worked.
Probably good to have a level of unpredictablility to what you do
Trump said Comey was lying. And AFTER Comey already testified he still alluded to the tapes, which wouldn’t make sense in his brilliant 4D chess move you’re talking about.
So help me here. Was Comey telling the truth? And why would Trump still talk about the tapes after he testified if the reason for talking about the tapes was to get Comey to tell the truth?
Trump: “But we were very, very happy, and, frankly, James Comey confirmed a lot of what I said, and some of the things that he said just weren’t true.”
He told the truth where it mattered : Trump was never under investigation at any point
It only “worked” if Comey was planning on lying if Trump hadn’t bluffed. It also only “worked” if that was actually Trump’s intent with his bluff (no way to know I guess).
I don’t think Trump is in any danger at all of being labelled “predictable” in a grand sense. Apart from his constant bluffing, almost everything he does is pretty unpredictable.
Ok, so ignoring the clear inconsistencies with your previous statements your new position is that he told the truth when you like what he says, but not the truth when you don’t?
Your bias is showing raj.
[quote=“pfury, post:1931, topic:226860, full:true”]
It only “worked” if Comey was planning on lying if Trump hadn’t bluffed. It also only “worked” if that was actually Trump’s intent with his bluff (no way to know I guess). [/quote]
Yup but IF Comey intended to lie, now he couldn’t
Considering Trump kept the bluff up after Comey testified, I think it is safe to say raj pulled this logic from the Trump reddit sewers and didn’t give it a full shake before realizing it didn’t make sense.
Agreed. Just feels to me like buying insurance against hurricanes, in Nebraska. Then again, nobody ever accused Trump of being cost effective with his political moves.
He definitely has a level of unpredictability. You couldn’t predict that he wouldn’t do anything substantial about immigrants
There is a trans dimensional toroidal transition that occurs. Using the inverted cube model this creates a diffraction of the transformation which causes the meaning to change as it is dispersed. Interestingly enough, once diffracted, even when reflected the toroidal transformtion isn’t reversed because of the diffraction stage between the reflection and the transition. It actually just becomes worse.
Exactly.
So guys tell me: is Comey and the FBI still not political?
Secret sources
As opposed to the snarky, biased, personal screed that is the link you posted.