Lib media still in meltdown over no collusion report

[Ucfmikes]

The Russians are absolutely our enemy. They actively try to subvert the US and our interests at every chance they get.

Putin was the head of the KGB during much of the Cold War. He remembers the glory days of Russia and if you think he wouldn't love to see the US reduced to nothing, you've got another thing coming.

You're obviously a young guy. Shookster, like me, grew up during the Cold War. One thing we learned, NEVER trust the Russians, EVER. EVER.

There’s just no way that you can compare our relationship in the 50s and during the time of the Cuban missile crisis to now. Maybe they cannot be trusted, but Trump was certainly trying to improve our relationship with them until the whole collusion debacle killed any chance of that

Superpowers should get along. Our relationship with Russia is no worse than many other countries. It’s so great with China??

Additionally, this thread isn’t even about this, but Shookster likes to go on tangents

 

[fabknight]

Investigating criminals =/= spying

hope this helps.

Criminals=Crimes committed.

There were no crimes and therefore no criminals. Or are you still referring to the info included in the unverified, fake dossier that was all fabricated to simply take down Trump and all those associated with his campaign and all later debunked?

It was 100% pure spying - this should scare the shit out of you.

 

[fabknight]

There’s just no way that you can compare our relationship in the 50s and during the time of the Cuban middle crisis to now. Maybe they cannot be trusted, but Trump was certainly trying to improve our relationship with them until the whole collusion debacle killed any chance of that

Superpowers should get along. Our relationship with Russia is no worse than many other countries. It’s so great with China??

Additionally, this thread isn’t even about this, but Shookster likes to go on tangents

The 50's? Shuckster was an infant in the late 50's and I wasn't even a gleam in my dad's eyeball, yet.

I was thinking the Cold War like that went through the 70's and early 80's. Superpowers with such differing ideologies do not get along. Compare who Russia supports versus who we support.

 

[Ucfmikes]

The 50's? Shuckster was an infant in the late 50's and I wasn't even a gleam in my dad's eyeball, yet.

I was thinking the Cold War like that went through the 70's and early 80's. Superpowers with such differing ideologies do not get along. Compare who Russia supports versus who we support.

So basically you’re saying that we have given up hope with them and the POTUS shouldn’t try to strengthen relationships?

Obviously, not this president, since after all that has transpired, he’s has radar on him

 

[fabknight]

So basically you’re saying that we have given up hope with them and the POTUS shouldn’t try to strengthen relationships?

Obviously, not this president, since after all that has transpired, he’s has radar on him

Not at all. The POTUS should try and strengthen relations. As Reagan once said, "Trust but verify".

 

[JAFFX2]

This sums it up PERFECTLY!

 

[Husk in butt]

This sums it up PERFECTLY!

View embedded media

Drop mic

 

[JAFFX2]

Drop mic

Exactly what he did!

 

[UCFBS]

Not at all. The POTUS should try and strengthen relations. As Reagan once said, "Trust but verify".

Fab, you think well above a 3rd grade level, too high for the media watching minions.

I swear these last 5 years are just proof that too many people live for demonizations, instead of logic.

 

[UCFWayne]

i guess mueller is supposed to talk to the house sometime this week or is it next week? i cant wait to see another tds meltdown.

 

[UCFWayne]

https://thehill.com/policy/national...says-mueller-will-not-be-testifying-next-week

Nadler says Mueller will not testify next week

“It won’t be next week. We’re negotiating now,” Nadler said. “We’re talking with him and the Justice Department.”

Nadler did not give a specific reason for why Mueller would not testify next week, telling reporters it “just hasn’t developed.”

“He will come at some point. If it’s necessary, we will subpoena him and he will come,” Nadler said later.

 

[UCFWayne]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...losi-did-you-bring-your-handcuffs/3688072002/

Attorney General Barr to House Speaker Pelosi: 'Did you bring your handcuffs?'

 

[UCFWayne]

My Campaign for President was conclusively spied on. Nothing like this has ever happened in American Politics. A really bad situation. TREASON means long jail sentences, and this was TREASON!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 17, 2019

 

[Cubs79]

My Campaign for President was conclusively spied on. Nothing like this has ever happened in American Politics. A really bad situation. TREASON means long jail sentences, and this was TREASON!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 17, 2019

This sounds like nothing short of a wanna be dictator. If an investigation shows crimes were committed, then by all means determine appropriate sentences and what not. But, that isnt the presidents call to make and these types of statements do nothing to undermine the notion a lot of people have of him that he wants to be a dictator.

 

[Cubs79]

Criminals=Crimes committed.

There were no crimes and therefore no criminals. Or are you still referring to the info included in the unverified, fake dossier that was all fabricated to simply take down Trump and all those associated with his campaign and all later debunked?

It was 100% pure spying - this should scare the shit out of you.

There were crimes and criminals. People tend to be forgetting that people close to and/or a part of his campaign were indeed charged with crimes.

 

[UCFKnight85]

This sounds like nothing short of a wanna be dictator. If an investigation shows crimes were committed, then by all means determine appropriate sentences and what not. But, that isnt the presidents call to make and these types of statements do nothing to undermine the notion a lot of people have of him that he wants to be a dictator.

lol so Democrats can spend 2+ years calling him a traitor and being guilty of treason, but he can't reciprocate when there's actually more evidence of what he's claiming that the bullshit they peddled for 2 years?

 

[Cubs79]

lol so Democrats can spend 2+ years calling him a traitor and being guilty of treason, but he can't reciprocate when there's actually more evidence of what he's claiming that the bullshit they peddled for 2 years?

So you think a sitting president should determine who is and isnt guility of treason? That is precisely what dictators do. And if you are speaking of news people saying those things, that isnt remotely the same thing as a president saying those things. News people have no power with regards to this.

 

[UCFWayne]

This sounds like nothing short of a wanna be dictator. If an investigation shows crimes were committed, then by all means determine appropriate sentences and what not. But, that isnt the presidents call to make and these types of statements do nothing to undermine the notion a lot of people have of him that he wants to be a dictator.

im surprised you didnt use the current buzz word constitutional crisis.

 

[Cubs79]

im surprised you didnt use the current buzz word constitutional crisis.

It isnt a buzzword. A sitting president calling to jail people with no investigation or trial sounds precisely like a dictator. You can brush it off all you want to, but there is no difference in the mindset.

 

[UCFWayne]

It isnt a buzzword. A sitting president calling to jail people with no investigation or trial sounds precisely like a dictator. You can brush it off all you want to, but there is no difference in the mindset.

but there is an investigation that is just getting started. there is proof of the spying as evidence from the other investigation. we shall see if it was legal or not. my guess is not.

 

[Cubs79]

but there is an investigation that is just getting started. there is proof of the spying as evidence from the other investigation. we shall see if it was legal or not. my guess is not.

Then he should wait for the investigation to conclude. You admit you dont know if it was legal or not, so how you can be ok with a sitting president already determining it was illegal?

 

[UCFKnight85]

So you think a sitting president should determine who is and isnt guility of treason? That is precisely what dictators do. And if you are speaking of news people saying those things, that isnt remotely the same thing as a president saying those things. News people have no power with regards to this.

He's not deciding that and he has no authority to do that either. He's basically popping off on Twitter the same way that Democrats did for 2+ years.

And no, I'm talking about Democrats in Congress, some of whom now hold important Committee Chairs and are wasting everyone's time with more frivolous investigations. They accused him of treason for 2+ years and seemingly you had no issue with it. Trump does it in a dumb tweet and suddenly you're labeling him a Dictator.

 

[Cubs79]

He's not deciding that and he has no authority to do that either. He's basically popping off on Twitter the same way that Democrats did for 2+ years.

And no, I'm talking about Democrats in Congress, some of whom now hold important Committee Chairs and are wasting everyone's time with more frivolous investigations. They accused him of treason for 2+ years and seemingly you had no issue with it. Trump does it in a dumb tweet and suddenly you're labeling him a Dictator.

Popping off on twitter matters and his tweets are by law considered official presidential statements.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/arti...s_tweets_are_official_presidential_statements
There is a saying I am sure you have heard, "when someone shows you who they are, believe them". His "popping off on twitter", is who he is.

ANd you are right, he has no power in and of himself. But I think Barr is worrisome since he has basically acted as Trump's defense attorney through a lot of this. I think the concern is Barr would carry out things on behalf of Trump, or if Trump crossed a line Barr wouldnt do his job appropriately. Hopefully it never gets to that, but Barr has brought questions of his integrity on himself, and they are legitiate questions and concerns.

And you are going to have to cite who in power has called him treasonous. Pelosi has said she doesnt even want to impeach, which would hardly indicate the most powerful Democrats have said he has committed treason.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Popping off on twitter matters and his tweets are by law considered official presidential statements.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/arti...s_tweets_are_official_presidential_statements
There is a saying I am sure you have heard, "when someone shows you who they are, believe them". His "popping off on twitter", is who he is.

ANd you are right, he has no power in and of himself. But I think Barr is worrisome since he has basically acted as Trump's defense attorney through a lot of this. I think the concern is Barr would carry out things on behalf of Trump, or if Trump crossed a line Barr wouldnt do his job appropriately. Hopefully it never gets to that, but Barr has brought questions of his integrity on himself, and they are legitiate questions and concerns.

And you are going to have to cite who in power has called him treasonous. Pelosi has said she doesnt even want to impeach, which would hardly indicate the most powerful Democrats have said he has committed treason.

Here's an expert from an article that detailed how Democrats raised the "traitor" flag without sometimes having to say it. John Brennan, Obama's CIA Chief, would go on TV and lie to everyone, claiming that he had seen evidence of "treason" and he said this over and over. He went on as many TV shows as he could to say this. And he wanted everyone to believe him since he was the former CIA chief and people would just assume he had access to that "evidence".

Schiff, Stoyer, and other Democrats would then go on the same TV shows and reference Brennan's remarks, clearly implying that they are saying treason without having to say it. Just reference the Obama CIA chief who is out there lying to everyone and the "traitor" message can keep going.

Though Watson Coleman used the #TreasonSummit hashtag, she has chosen not to say the word in public yet, her spokeswoman said.

And Rep. Jan Shakowsky, D-Ill., was the only one of 10 Democrats at a Tuesday news conference on Trump’s Helsinki summit to mention the word “treason.” But even she didn’t directly accuse Trump of that offense. Instead, she thanked Brennan for “using the word that is starting to pop up now, and that word is treason.” She noted that her own statement said Trump’s conduct “borders on treason.”

Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, called Trump a “traitor” at Tuesday’s protest in front of the White House.

“I believe that (Trump’s) behavior is commonly understood as treasonous,” said Tanden, who served as policy aide to President Barack Obama.

And several Democrats quoted Brennan’s statement.

“I agree with John Brennan, who said that it was ‘nothing short of treasonous,’” House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer told reporters Wednesday. “It is the duty of every patriot who loves their country to stand up and speak out against this dangerous and dishonest behavior.”

 

[sk8knight]

Popping off on twitter matters and his tweets are by law considered official presidential statements.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/arti...s_tweets_are_official_presidential_statements
There is a saying I am sure you have heard, "when someone shows you who they are, believe them". His "popping off on twitter", is who he is.

ANd you are right, he has no power in and of himself. But I think Barr is worrisome since he has basically acted as Trump's defense attorney through a lot of this. I think the concern is Barr would carry out things on behalf of Trump, or if Trump crossed a line Barr wouldnt do his job appropriately. Hopefully it never gets to that, but Barr has brought questions of his integrity on himself, and they are legitiate questions and concerns.

And you are going to have to cite who in power has called him treasonous. Pelosi has said she doesnt even want to impeach, which would hardly indicate the most powerful Democrats have said he has committed treason.

Can we stop saying treason? None of these actions amount to treason. Treason has a very defined scope and is largely about aiding and abetting an enemy in a time of war. Yelling treason from any side is nothing more than emotional appeal.

 

[UCFWayne]

Then he should wait for the investigation to conclude. You admit you dont know if it was legal or not, so how you can be ok with a sitting president already determining it was illegal?

i dont like it, but after 2+ years of the media and members of congress going crazy on a lie of russian collusion, i honestly dont care anymore.

 

[UCFWayne]

He's not deciding that and he has no authority to do that either. He's basically popping off on Twitter the same way that Democrats did for 2+ years.

And no, I'm talking about Democrats in Congress, some of whom now hold important Committee Chairs and are wasting everyone's time with more frivolous investigations. They accused him of treason for 2+ years and seemingly you had no issue with it. Trump does it in a dumb tweet and suddenly you're labeling him a Dictator.

its funny because i used to care about that this stuff more. but after 2+ years of this crap from them, im really done with it. they did their best to kill off any integrity and now are demanding to hold others to a standard they abandoned long ago. get out of here with that crap.

 

[Cubs79]

Can we stop saying treason? None of these actions amount to treason. Treason has a very defined scope and is largely about aiding and abetting an enemy in a time of war. Yelling treason from any side is nothing more than emotional appeal.

Trump is the one yelling treason.

 

[Cubs79]

Here's an expert from an article that detailed how Democrats raised the "traitor" flag without sometimes having to say it. John Brennan, Obama's CIA Chief, would go on TV and lie to everyone, claiming that he had seen evidence of "treason" and he said this over and over. He went on as many TV shows as he could to say this. And he wanted everyone to believe him since he was the former CIA chief and people would just assume he had access to that "evidence".

Schiff, Stoyer, and other Democrats would then go on the same TV shows and reference Brennan's remarks, clearly implying that they are saying treason without having to say it. Just reference the Obama CIA chief who is out there lying to everyone and the "traitor" message can keep going.

Though Watson Coleman used the #TreasonSummit hashtag, she has chosen not to say the word in public yet, her spokeswoman said.

And Rep. Jan Shakowsky, D-Ill., was the only one of 10 Democrats at a Tuesday news conference on Trump’s Helsinki summit to mention the word “treason.” But even she didn’t directly accuse Trump of that offense. Instead, she thanked Brennan for “using the word that is starting to pop up now, and that word is treason.” She noted that her own statement said Trump’s conduct “borders on treason.”

Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, called Trump a “traitor” at Tuesday’s protest in front of the White House.

“I believe that (Trump’s) behavior is commonly understood as treasonous,” said Tanden, who served as policy aide to President Barack Obama.

And several Democrats quoted Brennan’s statement.

“I agree with John Brennan, who said that it was ‘nothing short of treasonous,’” House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer told reporters Wednesday. “It is the duty of every patriot who loves their country to stand up and speak out against this dangerous and dishonest behavior.”

You basically gave me talking heads in the media. Brennan hasnt been in the CIA in almost 3 years and is basically nothing more than a cable news guest now. Tanden is the head of a think tank and hasnt worked under Obama since 2011. The others you are saying "implied" treason. You can have issue with their language, but talking heads have no legal or real power.

 

[Cubs79]

its funny because i used to care about that this stuff more. but after 2+ years of this crap from them, im really done with it. they did their best to kill off any integrity and now are demanding to hold others to a standard they abandoned long ago. get out of here with that crap.

Dude, come on. Trump killed integrity, and the thing is, Repulicans know this too. There was even a consideration to try and replace him at the convention with Paul Ryan. Even considering that doesnt happen if a party is comfortable with the person who won their primaries. Sure, many have switched on a dime now because they have no conviction, but this idea that it is Democrats who caused all this and Trump is nothing more than an innocent bystander is ridiculous.

 

[sk8knight]

Trump is the one yelling treason.

At this moment. For 2 years it was a number of people on the left. Either way, no one has perpetrated treason.

 

[UCFKnight85]

You basically gave me talking heads in the media. Brennan hasnt been in the CIA in almost 3 years and is basically nothing more than a cable news guest now. Tanden is the head of a think tank and hasnt worked under Obama since 2011. The others you are saying "implied" treason. You can have issue with their language, but talking heads have no legal or real power.

Dude, Steny Hoyer is the farking Democratic House Majority Leader. Are you really being this disingenuous?

 

[UCFWayne]

Dude, come on. Trump killed integrity, and the thing is, Repulicans know this too. There was even a consideration to try and replace him at the convention with Paul Ryan. Even considering that doesnt happen if a party is comfortable with the person who won their primaries. Sure, many have switched on a dime now because they have no conviction, but this idea that it is Democrats who caused all this and Trump is nothing more than an innocent bystander is ridiculous.

integrity died a long time before trump ran for office. lol at your ridiculous claim.

it died back when bush was in office and the media didnt ask the tough questions. they tried to get a little bit of it back by going after him. then it died again when obama became president and the media completely looked the other way for him. but here you sit and act like this is all on trump.

you just dont like it that trump doesnt care at all what the media says, is not pc, and doesnt apologize for anything. but in reality, it was the media and the lefts 8 years of looking the other way that paved the road for trump to become president. i would like to thank you for that, hes doing a good job.

 

[Cubs79]

Dude, Steny Hoyer is the farking Democratic House Majority Leader. Are you really being this disingenuous?

Cool. You got one, who also says he doesnt even want to impeach, much less is talking about long prison sentences like Trump is.

 

[Cubs79]

integrity died a long time before trump ran for office. lol at your ridiculous claim.

it died back when bush was in office and the media didnt ask the tough questions. they tried to get a little bit of it back by going after him. then it died again when obama became president and the media completely looked the other way for him. but here you sit and act like this is all on trump.

you just dont like it that trump doesnt care at all what the media says, is not pc, and doesnt apologize for anything. but in reality, it was the media and the lefts 8 years of looking the other way that paved the road for trump to become president. i would like to thank you for that, hes doing a good job.

I also dont like that Trump is extremely secretive with his finances, appoints his daughter and son in law to advisory positions, who are also very secretive with their finances, had a campaign manager and top advisor for a while who in his own words has said he wants to tear down the entire system and build it from scratch, etc et. And certainly, I dont like Trump's language. But saying people are treasonous and deserve long prison sentences has nothing to do with political correctness. Talking about "2nd amendment solutions" if he lost the election, has nothing to do with political correctness etc etc. Which is another thing we need to stop with. Acting like having an issue with someones statements is always just political correctness and nothing more is ridiculous.

 

[sk8knight]

integrity died a long time before trump ran for office. lol at your ridiculous claim.

it died back when bush was in office and the media didnt ask the tough questions. they tried to get a little bit of it back by going after him. then it died again when obama became president and the media completely looked the other way for him. but here you sit and act like this is all on trump.

you just dont like it that trump doesnt care at all what the media says, is not pc, and doesnt apologize for anything. but in reality, it was the media and the lefts 8 years of looking the other way that paved the road for trump to become president. i would like to thank you for that, hes doing a good job.

I'm thinking that "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" killed the facade of integrity in the office of the POTUS.

 

[DaShuckster]

I'm thinking that "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" killed the facade of integrity in the office of the POTUS.

You do recall that Tricky Dick was before Bill, right?

 

[sk8knight]

You do recall that Tricky Dick was before Bill, right?

Sure, then we can go back to JFK whoring around the country. But good point, Tricky Dick is a stronger example. Point is, there’s plenty of ammo to go around when it comes to Presidential lies.

 

[UCFBS]

This sounds like nothing short of a wanna be dictator.

It's funny how you call him a dictator, but when Congressional Democrats say the same thing, they are about 'accountability.'

Thank our founders for the Libertarians at Judicial Watch. They are going after both parties (yes, they have stuff on Trump too).

If an investigation shows crimes were committed, then by all means determine appropriate sentences and what not.

To date, only Barr has recommended they be investigated. It's about time. I'm still shocked every time this comes up, Progressives and Democrats think it's wrong.

I want all parties investigated.

I don't think people realize that Mueller's full, unredacted report is ugly for both parties. But he was only allowed to investigate and charge attempting to get people to 'turn over' on Trump. That was the same thing with Starr and the Clintons prior in the '90s.

Clinton hasn't had a special, independent investigator assigned since the '90s, and her lawyers were able to get the DoJ to agree to limitations on the FBI in the '10s.

But, that isnt the presidents call to make and these types of statements do nothing to undermine the notion a lot of people have of him that he wants to be a dictator.

Then you mean Clinton, W. and Obama too?

I think you forget Clinton using FBI and OPM files against his political enemies -- the whole reason the Trump administration didn't know a staffer was a wife-beater (they didn't have access to FBI and OPM files -- especially since both ex's said he wasn't a national security risk) -- and everyone got an IRS audit.

Clinton takes the cake, sorry.

Although Obama made a lot of statements, and even more Executive Orders and Emergency Declarations that certainly sounded dictatorish. But the Trump administration is young. He may still exceed Obama.

 

[UCFWayne]

It's funny how you call him a dictator, but when Congressional Democrats say the same thing, they are about 'accountability.'

Thank our founders for the Libertarians at Judicial Watch. They are going after both parties (yes, they have stuff on Trump too).

To date, only Barr has recommended they be investigated. It's about time. I'm still shocked every time this comes up, Progressives and Democrats think it's wrong.

I want all parties investigated.

I don't think people realize that Mueller's full, unredacted report is ugly for both parties. But he was only allowed to investigate and charge attempting to get people to 'turn over' on Trump. That was the same thing with Starr and the Clintons prior in the '90s.

Clinton hasn't had a special, independent investigator assigned since the '90s, and her lawyers were able to get the DoJ to agree to limitations on the FBI in the '10s.

Then you mean Clinton, W. and Obama too?

I think you forget Clinton using FBI and OPM files against his political enemies -- the whole reason the Trump administration didn't know a staffer was a wife-beater (they didn't have access to FBI and OPM files -- especially since both ex's said he wasn't a national security risk) -- and everyone got an IRS audit.

Clinton takes the cake, sorry.

Although Obama made a lot of statements, and even more Executive Orders and Emergency Declarations that certainly sounded dictatorish. But the Trump administration is young. He may still exceed Obama.

@UCFBS you clearly dont know that orange man is bad! racist!*