No Republican has challenged the credibility of Andrew McCabe's book

[BWK]

Are you not watching the news? Trey Gowdy Was on tv the last 3 days lol

Democrats stop watching fake news

Trey Gowdy was disgraced when got caught trying to frame Clinton. The guy is useless.

Really? Not to me or most people

Your "most people" you know, are the same crowd who eat out of the same can of stupid.

Wow so angry what did we do to you?

I don't eat out of the same can as your "most people" do. It isn't about anger for me. Your "most people" are the one's obsessed with that.

 

[jc456]

Are you not watching the news? Trey Gowdy Was on tv the last 3 days lol

Democrats stop watching fake news

Trey Gowdy was disgraced when got caught trying to frame Clinton. The guy is useless.

Really? Not to me or most people

Your "most people" you know, are the same crowd who eat out of the same can of stupid.

Wow so angry what did we do to you?

I don't eat out of the same can as your "most people" do. It isn't about anger for me. Your "most people" are the one's obsessed with that.

name a hate crime.

 

[Polishprince]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

The Inspector General determined that McCabe lied, not President Trump.

It isn't up to Republicans to "refute" anything. I don't think one in a hundred thousand Republicans has read the man's book yet and its disrespectful to refute something they aren't looking at.

but he did admit he discussed using the 25th amendment to take out a duly elected president. that is a coup.

Negative! That is not a coup. That is a responsibility, given the facts of the case, by which the book, and the results of McCabe's actions have reached fruition. Rosenstein and McCabe would have been derelict in their duties had they not discussed all options, as it related to a president who could very possibly, and most likely, be working for Russia

What makes you think that its the job of the unelected Secret Police to use the 25th Amendment to depose any president? Who do Rosenstein and McCabe think they are? Beria and Yezhov? Beria bragged he disposed of President Stalin.

 

[bodecea]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

If they made some lame ass attempt at countering McCabe's book it would likely involve something like, "but Obama," "but Hillary," or some shit along those lines.

In the mean time, we are still waiting on the rebuttal from McCabe's book. Lol!

all one needs to know is that he was organizing a coup using the 25th amendment. are you going to say he didn't say that?

How is something that is completely Constitutional a "coup"? Please explain.

 

[jc456]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

If they made some lame ass attempt at countering McCabe's book it would likely involve something like, "but Obama," "but Hillary," or some shit along those lines.

In the mean time, we are still waiting on the rebuttal from McCabe's book. Lol!

all one needs to know is that he was organizing a coup using the 25th amendment. are you going to say he didn't say that?

How is something that is completely Constitutional a "coup"? Please explain.

well first you need to know the constitution and what the 25th amendment is. you don't. it's obvious. just a point of note, you should actually learn who uses it. you're welcome.

 

[blastoff]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

Well when the author has no credibility because he’s a serial liar it becomes a moot point.

Serial liar about what?

Um...not my job to teach you current events, dipshit. If you’re not aware he’s lied (lack of candor in FBI-speak) I’m not wasting a nano of a nanosecond on your worthless ass. You dont’ like, tough shit.

 

[BWK]

The Inspector General determined that McCabe lied, not President Trump.

It isn't up to Republicans to "refute" anything. I don't think one in a hundred thousand Republicans has read the man's book yet and its disrespectful to refute something they aren't looking at.

but he did admit he discussed using the 25th amendment to take out a duly elected president. that is a coup.

Negative! That is not a coup. That is a responsibility, given the facts of the case, by which the book, and the results of McCabe's actions have reached fruition. Rosenstein and McCabe would have been derelict in their duties had they not discussed all options, as it related to a president who could very possibly, and most likely, be working for Russia

not his job to be discussing the 25th amendment. sorry nothing else it could be.

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

 

[jc456]

but he did admit he discussed using the 25th amendment to take out a duly elected president. that is a coup.

Negative! That is not a coup. That is a responsibility, given the facts of the case, by which the book, and the results of McCabe's actions have reached fruition. Rosenstein and McCabe would have been derelict in their duties had they not discussed all options, as it related to a president who could very possibly, and most likely, be working for Russia

not his job to be discussing the 25th amendment. sorry nothing else it could be.

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

can't make it up. there you go. no point furthering a discussion with someone who ignores the constitution. I posted to you the procedure. you ignore it. you just want to be right no matter if it means you make it up as you go. you are left.

 

[BWK]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

Well when the author has no credibility because he’s a serial liar it becomes a moot point.

Serial liar about what?

Um...not my job to teach you current events, dipshit. If you’re not aware he’s lied (lack of candor in FBI-speak) I’m not wasting a nano of a nanosecond on your worthless ass. You dont’ like, tough shit.

Then don't. I've done my own, which explains why you can't . Lol!

 

[jc456]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

Well when the author has no credibility because he’s a serial liar it becomes a moot point.

Serial liar about what?

Um...not my job to teach you current events, dipshit. If you’re not aware he’s lied (lack of candor in FBI-speak) I’m not wasting a nano of a nanosecond on your worthless ass. You dont’ like, tough shit.

Then don't. I've done my own, which explains why you can't . Lol!

you can't learn. it would be a fking complete waste of time. you have no ability to learn.

 

[BWK]

Negative! That is not a coup. That is a responsibility, given the facts of the case, by which the book, and the results of McCabe's actions have reached fruition. Rosenstein and McCabe would have been derelict in their duties had they not discussed all options, as it related to a president who could very possibly, and most likely, be working for Russia

not his job to be discussing the 25th amendment. sorry nothing else it could be.

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

can't make it up. there you go. no point furthering a discussion with someone who ignores the constitution.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Nothing in the 25th says that McCabe and Rosenstein cannot discuss the 25th.

 

[jc456]

not his job to be discussing the 25th amendment. sorry nothing else it could be.

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

can't make it up. there you go. no point furthering a discussion with someone who ignores the constitution.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Nothing in the 25th says that McCabe and Rosenstein cannot discuss the 25th.

hahaahahahaaha, just wait and see. I'm going to enjoy that show. it's called a coup.

 

[BWK]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

Well when the author has no credibility because he’s a serial liar it becomes a moot point.

Serial liar about what?

Um...not my job to teach you current events, dipshit. If you’re not aware he’s lied (lack of candor in FBI-speak) I’m not wasting a nano of a nanosecond on your worthless ass. You dont’ like, tough shit.

Then don't. I've done my own, which explains why you can't . Lol!

you can't learn. it would be a fking complete waste of time. you have no ability to learn.

You can't explain the lie either.

 

[jc456]

Well when the author has no credibility because he’s a serial liar it becomes a moot point.

Serial liar about what?

Um...not my job to teach you current events, dipshit. If you’re not aware he’s lied (lack of candor in FBI-speak) I’m not wasting a nano of a nanosecond on your worthless ass. You dont’ like, tough shit.

Then don't. I've done my own, which explains why you can't . Lol!

you can't learn. it would be a fking complete waste of time. you have no ability to learn.

You can't explain the lie either.

I told you you couldn't learn. I just explained why it was a waste of time and boom, there you are.

BTW, one has to be willing to learn to learn. you are unwilling. you are only out to make shit up and point fingers and call people names, no desire to learn.

 

[Polishprince]

not his job to be discussing the 25th amendment. sorry nothing else it could be.

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

can't make it up. there you go. no point furthering a discussion with someone who ignores the constitution.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Nothing in the 25th says that McCabe and Rosenstein cannot discuss the 25th.

If McCabe and Rosenstein want to discuss the 25th Amendment- or old movies, the punic wars or nascar- over a couple of cocktails at a local dive, that's their privilege.

Its just not part of their job description, and they need to be working at the job they are being paid for in the work place. Not shooting the breeze about the 25th amendment.

 

[jc456]

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

can't make it up. there you go. no point furthering a discussion with someone who ignores the constitution.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Nothing in the 25th says that McCabe and Rosenstein cannot discuss the 25th.

If McCabe and Rosenstein want to discuss the 25th Amendment- or old movies, the punic wars or nascar- over a couple of cocktails at a local dive, that's their privilege.

Its just not part of their job description, and they need to be working at the job they are being paid for in the work place. Not shooting the breeze about the 25th amendment.

they were working on recruiting cabinet members to go along with them. that is the VP's job. that is against the law. but these stupid traitors don't know america. they don't like america and are trying to destroy america.

 

[bodecea]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

The Inspector General determined that McCabe lied, not President Trump.

It isn't up to Republicans to "refute" anything. I don't think one in a hundred thousand Republicans has read the man's book yet and its disrespectful to refute something they aren't looking at.

but he did admit he discussed using the 25th amendment to take out a duly elected president. that is a coup.

Negative! That is not a coup. That is a responsibility, given the facts of the case, by which the book, and the results of McCabe's actions have reached fruition. Rosenstein and McCabe would have been derelict in their duties had they not discussed all options, as it related to a president who could very possibly, and most likely, be working for Russia

What makes you think that its the job of the unelected Secret Police to use the 25th Amendment to depose any president? Who do Rosenstein and McCabe think they are? Beria and Yezhov? Beria bragged he disposed of President Stalin.

So...this is the 25th Amendment:

Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Where does it prohibit members of the FBI or any agency or individual from INQUIRING as to whether the 25th Amendment applies?

 

[bodecea]

Lawrence's Last Word: Andrew McCabe's credibility So, if Andrew McCabe is the liar like Trump claims, then how come no Republican has refuted McCabe's book? There are some seriously damaging concerns McCabe points out in the book that lead to having a SC, and yet, neither Trump or his followers have any counter arguing points that dismiss those concerns. I mean think about it, if McCabe's concerns weren't legit, why hasn't the Right explained those concerns away? Obviously McCabe and Rosenstein were spot on to inject a SC with so many indictments and guilty pleas handed over to people surrounding the Trump campaign?

And if they have no answers, then what exactly was the justification for firing McCabe?

If they made some lame ass attempt at countering McCabe's book it would likely involve something like, "but Obama," "but Hillary," or some shit along those lines.

In the mean time, we are still waiting on the rebuttal from McCabe's book. Lol!

all one needs to know is that he was organizing a coup using the 25th amendment. are you going to say he didn't say that?

How is something that is completely Constitutional a "coup"? Please explain.

well first you need to know the constitution and what the 25th amendment is. you don't. it's obvious. just a point of note, you should actually learn who uses it. you're welcome.

Here it is. Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Now explain how something completely Constitutional is a "coup".....TIA.

 

[BWK]

If they made some lame ass attempt at countering McCabe's book it would likely involve something like, "but Obama," "but Hillary," or some shit along those lines.

In the mean time, we are still waiting on the rebuttal from McCabe's book. Lol!

all one needs to know is that he was organizing a coup using the 25th amendment. are you going to say he didn't say that?

How is something that is completely Constitutional a "coup"? Please explain.

well first you need to know the constitution and what the 25th amendment is. you don't. it's obvious. just a point of note, you should actually learn who uses it. you're welcome.

Here it is. Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Now explain how something completely Constitutional is a "coup".....TIA.

They cannot.

 

[BWK]

Oh it absolutely is. In the case of a national security threat, you bet your ass it is their responsibility to bring all options to the table for the defense of the country.

naw, it isn't. sorry to burst your bubble.

The 25th Amendment, explained: how a president can be declared unfit to serve

"Specifically, that’s Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. The amendment states that if, for whatever reason, the vice president and a majority of sitting Cabinet secretaries decide that the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,” they can simply put that down in writing and send it to two people — the speaker of the House and the Senate’s president pro tempore."

Are you reading comprehension impaired? Nothing says there cannot be a discussion about the 25th Amendment between Rosenstein and McCabe. Remember, the VP and cabinet secretaries don't always have the same set of facts at their disposal as law enforcement.

can't make it up. there you go. no point furthering a discussion with someone who ignores the constitution.

Your statement makes absolutely no sense. Nothing in the 25th says that McCabe and Rosenstein cannot discuss the 25th.

If McCabe and Rosenstein want to discuss the 25th Amendment- or old movies, the punic wars or nascar- over a couple of cocktails at a local dive, that's their privilege.

Its just not part of their job description, and they need to be working at the job they are being paid for in the work place. Not shooting the breeze about the 25th amendment.

They weren't shooting the breeze.