He knew what he signed for
- Thread starter UCF11and1
- Start date
In before "it's a Democrat politician with an agenda". But also in with, "if true then this guy deserves the whitest flames of hell".
You apparently forgot one, @KnighttimeJoe. We can use his kindergarten-level mastery of the English language as an excuse as well.
Remember folks, you're only allowed to be outraged when some random person on Twitter says Nazi's are bad!
Fool me once, blah, blah, blah. I'm still waiting on proof of his wires being tapped and voter fraud. This is his go-to since he has a knuckle-dragging part of his base that will just eat it up.
you do realize there is proof of the wire tap. while there is no proof on him specifically, there were taps on one of his aids.
there is also proof of voter fraud. not millions, but there is proof of some.
Wires tapped at Trump Tower like he implied? I hadn't seen that come out.
Also, I agree that there is always voter fraud...in every election...I'm waiting for the proof that was promised showing "widespread voter fraud" in this past election.
While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there.
Wasn’t he under surveillance long before the campaign? He’s been doing shady shit for a long time.
Hold up...anytime Manafort is brought up, Trumpies always tell us that he was barely part of the campaign and to disregard. Which one is it?
He worked for the campaign and was being spied on during that time. Obama and Clinton were trying to spy on everyone they could inside the Trump campaign and transition team.
Did the spying start before he was on the Trump campaign, or after? Pretty big difference.
this Pro Trump Twitter account got exposed as a Russian Propoganda troll
probably one of his most active support accounts along with those few other conspiracy nuts during the past year plus
I’m pretty sure it was before. I want to say he’s been in the radar since 2014-2015.
If that's the case wtf are Trumpets whining about?
If anything it's more damning against Trump, that he hired a scumbag.
Yep. He’s been under investigation since 2014 for his foreign business dealings specifically with Ukraine. Naturally after the election, he became a person of even more interest.
http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2017/09/19/paul-manafort-fbi-surveillance-donald-trump-russia
http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2017/09/19/paul-manafort-fbi-surveillance-donald-trump-russia
I'd be interested in hearing the full conversation and context.
There have already been enough of these on Trump where, once I heard the full conversation in its original context, it was nothing.
I mean, it can be a complement to a parent or spouse of a fallen soldier.
E.g., Gary Gordon comes to mind. If I was the President, talking to his mother or wife, I might have said the same thing.
"His chain of command repeatedly denied his request to engage, to put himself in harm's way with no option for backup. He knew what he was getting into, and he requested it any way. He knew what he was getting into, and he died, so others could live."
There have already been enough of these on Trump where, once I heard the full conversation in its original context, it was nothing.
I mean, it can be a complement to a parent or spouse of a fallen soldier.
E.g., Gary Gordon comes to mind. If I was the President, talking to his mother or wife, I might have said the same thing.
"His chain of command repeatedly denied his request to engage, to put himself in harm's way with no option for backup. He knew what he was getting into, and he requested it any way. He knew what he was getting into, and he died, so others could live."
So why exactly is it a bad thing that the "lines were tapped"?
Last edited:
So, the mother is now on-record saying President Trump disrespected the entire family.
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-with-soldiers-widow/?utm_term=.847c883c6089
So now it's no longer just a politician saying this.
Which means either Trump did it, or he's suggesting she was coerced after-the-fact by the politician, or it's just something that comes down to timing, sensitivity, insensitive and other factors.
Allegedly Kelly, among other staffers, were in the room.
I do believe this may be the end of Trump's phone calls though. Maybe that's what other President's figured out long ago, and why they usually write letters.
It's too easy to screw up when someone is very distressed, especially after doing it dozens upon dozens of times. The old "bedside manner" issue with doctors.
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-with-soldiers-widow/?utm_term=.847c883c6089
So now it's no longer just a politician saying this.
Which means either Trump did it, or he's suggesting she was coerced after-the-fact by the politician, or it's just something that comes down to timing, sensitivity, insensitive and other factors.
Allegedly Kelly, among other staffers, were in the room.
I do believe this may be the end of Trump's phone calls though. Maybe that's what other President's figured out long ago, and why they usually write letters.
It's too easy to screw up when someone is very distressed, especially after doing it dozens upon dozens of times. The old "bedside manner" issue with doctors.
?
I wasn't defending the President. I wanted to hear the full conversation to decide for myself. He can still be quite insensitive, and I'd like to read or hear it.
The David Duke thing, for example, was something I didn't have a problem with. Why? I read the entire transcript of the conversation. Most people didn't.
HINT: It was a bad mobile connection, and Trump said another name than David Duke, as he didn't hear that name. Trump had long lambasted David Duke, quite publicly, and even very recently (just months before).
well then its not that big of a deal. trump should stfu about it unless there is other evidence he was spied on.
Trump talks too much. The supermajority who voted for him agree.
However, if they recorded Trump as a result of this investigation, that's still a major issue. It's a problem that always results with law enforcement recording one party, but catches another not under investigation, and it could be used in ways that are ethical or legal ones. This has been the major problem with various surveillance since not only the FISA courts for nearly the past 50 years, but after the expansion of FBI powers by Clinton Executive Order in 1998, and when they became Congressional Law in the Patriot Act.
More and more FBI, DEA and other agents are going on-record stating that many FBI and DHS investigations are misappropriating evidence against 3rd parties that were not under the FISA order. And in the case of a Presidential candidate, one cannot be investigating one party over the Russians, without also investigating any possible misappropriation in the case of Manafort.
To me, as a Libertarian, I want it all to come out. No one should be downplaying anything. The gov't should always be scrutinized, and I tired of 'apologists' who align because of political parties, instead along civics, ethics and law.
Kelly just weighed in ...
- https://www.yahoo.com/news/kelly-de...-attacks-selfish-congresswoman-203732629.html
Gotta respect Kelly's position. He knows how it is. Looks like this is the US media really getting tabloid, and a Congresswoman looking for fame.
- https://www.yahoo.com/news/kelly-de...-attacks-selfish-congresswoman-203732629.html
Gotta respect Kelly's position. He knows how it is. Looks like this is the US media really getting tabloid, and a Congresswoman looking for fame.
Similar threads
