oragami_itto wrote:Manafort found guilty of 8 felonies.
Cohen pled guilty to 8 felonies, 2 directly implicate Trump.
I guess that's confirmation bias.
oragami_itto wrote:Manafort found guilty of 8 felonies.
Cohen pled guilty to 8 felonies, 2 directly implicate Trump.
I guess that's confirmation bias.
Steve James wrote:No matter what, historians are going to have a field day with his writings. They're bound to note that the guy who got out of serving because of heel spurs is calling (Republican) Mueller, who was a Marine rifle platoon leader in Vietnam, a "national disgrace."Lee Harvey Oswald honorably discharged from the corps, did that exonerate him from any wrong doing. In fact, it turns out that anyone who disagrees with him is unAmerican. We were taught that the right to speak one's mind was "American" and one of the (Constitutional) things that made America "great."
Steve James wrote:Sure he does. It's just funny when he calls someone a liar, dishonest, un-American and a disgrace to America for executing his right to free speech. Seems hypocritical to me.
You call it transparency, , but being transparently treasonous or stupid isn't a virtue. Sure, he can talk off the top of his head. However, he has the power to launch nuclear missiles on a whim too. Some people might prefer a president who thought before he spoke, instead of incessantly tweeting his thoughts diarrhea-like. Are you saying he is tresonouse, and stupid. would you rather have someone like the last president who made back room deals that are now being undone....because in part they were back room not in accordance with law.
Afa the press and media, he calls them the enemy of the people. But, they're talking about him. Calling them Trump's enemy might be correct, but saying it's because they're "bought and paid for" is just more convenient rhetoric. The press and media have always been commercial enterprises, bought and paid for. Nixon was at least as critical of the 1970s press and media as Trump is, maybe more. Nixon didn't, iirc, never picked on an individual reporter --not even Woodward or Bernstein. And, he didn't condemn the FBI, CIA, his AG, the Justice Department, and any other institution or institutional leader --even the Pope_- who disagreed with him. you might try google to see how much of the press is owned by who. Can you say how many of the Top FBI people just lost their jobs or removed from their positions...is there a historical precedent "The following is an attempt to begin compiling a more complete list of individuals with possible involvement or affiliation in Trump Surveillance, Steele Dossier and/or the Russia Narrative." https://themarketswork.com/2018/05/01/a ... ticipants/
Historians will read him saying "there was no collusion" in one tweet, but "if there was, collusion is not a crime," and "if it's a crime, they should be investigating Hillary." Historians will have a hard time deciding whether he thought collusion was wrong or not. How do we know? We're here now and we don't have a clue.
There are things he does that I don't care for but understand that its just his style,
for me the larger issue is whats being done to bring down a duly elected president.
Congressional investigators have confirmed that a top FBI official met with Democratic Party lawyers to talk about allegations of Donald Trump-Russia collusion weeks before the 2016 election, and before the bureau secured a search warrant targeting Trump’s campaign.
Former FBI general counsel James Baker met during the 2016 season with at least one attorney from Perkins Coie, the Democratic National Committee’s private law firm.
That’s the firm used by the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to secretly pay research firm Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence operative, to compile a dossier of uncorroborated raw intelligence alleging Trump and Moscow were colluding to hijack the presidential election.
seems like things are starting to get closer to finding out what really happened..
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 45 guests