Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why? Clinton didn't. As for Trump, if he's guilty, he should. If he isn't, he shouldn't.Sure, Clinton is gone, very good, time for Trump to resign.Agreed, just like Hillary "Sniper" Clinton's "dead broke" comment. Fucking politicians, eh?It sure is if Comey said it, and he did, and no one has evidence to the contrary. Trump was talking out his as and won't admit it.
If he is guilty of what?Why? Clinton didn't. As for Trump, if he's guilty, he should. If he isn't, he shouldn't.Sure, Clinton is gone, very good, time for Trump to resign.Agreed, just like Hillary "Sniper" Clinton's "dead broke" comment. Fucking politicians, eh?It sure is if Comey said it, and he did, and no one has evidence to the contrary. Trump was talking out his as and won't admit it.
Trump is president, Clinton is not. Your argument fails on the fallacy of degree not kind.Why? Clinton didn't. As for Trump, if he's guilty, he should. If he isn't, he shouldn't.Sure, Clinton is gone, very good, time for Trump to resign.Agreed, just like Hillary "Sniper" Clinton's "dead broke" comment. Fucking politicians, eh?It sure is if Comey said it, and he did, and no one has evidence to the contrary. Trump was talking out his as and won't admit it.
BTW, be careful what you wish for; your "circumstantial evidence" argument could easily be won by anyone in the Trump campaign in court.
There's no parsing of words. Trump lied about Obama wiretapping him but he tried to be nice about the president being an unrepentant liar.There are two issues I see with Comey's testimony that I haven't heard reported on:
1) Comey admitted that there was evidence to suggest Russia attempted to hack into other institutions, including the RNC. This is consistent with this story that Russia attempted to hack the RNC around the same time they hacked the DNC...they just were unsuccessful at doing so. It makes more sense that Russia wanted to create confusion in the election than simply help Trump win, which is why I take Comey and Rogers' statements that Russia wanted to hurt Hillary and help Trump with a grain of salt. If Russia wanted to help Trump win, why were they trying to hack the RNC?
2) People keep saying Comey flatly rejected Trump's tweets about Obama having him wire tapped. Couple of points with that. First of all, Comey said he's seen no information to support Trump's claim that Obama had him wiretapped. Aside from the fact that that answer doesn't completely eschew the idea that Trump was wiretapped, it's also a careful bit of word parsing. The question everyone wants to know is, "did the Obama administration have Trump surveilled during the 2016 election?" If, for example, Loretta Lynch authorized it, technically speaking that doesn't mean Obama did it, but it went down under his watch which is kind of the same thing. But also, "I have no information to support that claim" is...curiously noncommittal. If you recall, here's Comey testifying on whether Hillary Clinton told the truth about her private e-mail server. See how straightforward that is? I'm just saying. I think there's another shoe to drop.
Anything worth resigning over.If he is guilty of what?Why? Clinton didn't. As for Trump, if he's guilty, he should. If he isn't, he shouldn't.Sure, Clinton is gone, very good, time for Trump to resign.Agreed, just like Hillary "Sniper" Clinton's "dead broke" comment. Fucking politicians, eh?It sure is if Comey said it, and he did, and no one has evidence to the contrary. Trump was talking out his as and won't admit it.
Agreed that Hillary Clinton failed becoming President (twice!!!!), but Bill Clinton, who was actually impeached, was, indeed, President.Trump is president, Clinton is not. Your argument fails on the fallacy of degree not kind.Why? Clinton didn't. As for Trump, if he's guilty, he should. If he isn't, he shouldn't.Sure, Clinton is gone, very good, time for Trump to resign.Agreed, just like Hillary "Sniper" Clinton's "dead broke" comment. Fucking politicians, eh?It sure is if Comey said it, and he did, and no one has evidence to the contrary. Trump was talking out his as and won't admit it.
BTW, be careful what you wish for; your "circumstantial evidence" argument could easily be won by anyone in the Trump campaign in court.
Haha, according to some he's already done enough to warrant resignation, for others there's nothing he could do to warrant it.Anything worth resigning over.If he is guilty of what?Why? Clinton didn't. As for Trump, if he's guilty, he should. If he isn't, he shouldn't.Sure, Clinton is gone, very good, time for Trump to resign.Agreed, just like Hillary "Sniper" Clinton's "dead broke" comment. Fucking politicians, eh?It sure is if Comey said it, and he did, and no one has evidence to the contrary. Trump was talking out his as and won't admit it.
There are two issues I see with Comey's testimony that I haven't heard reported on:
1) Comey admitted that there was evidence to suggest Russia attempted to hack into other institutions, including the RNC. This is consistent with this story that Russia attempted to hack the RNC around the same time they hacked the DNC...they just were unsuccessful at doing so. It makes more sense that Russia wanted to create confusion in the election than simply help Trump win, which is why I take Comey and Rogers' statements that Russia wanted to hurt Hillary and help Trump with a grain of salt. If Russia wanted to help Trump win, why were they trying to hack the RNC?
2) People keep saying Comey flatly rejected Trump's tweets about Obama having him wire tapped. Couple of points with that. First of all, Comey said he's seen no information to support Trump's claim that Obama had him wiretapped. Aside from the fact that that answer doesn't completely eschew the idea that Trump was wiretapped, it's also a careful bit of word parsing. The question everyone wants to know is, "did the Obama administration have Trump surveilled during the 2016 election?" If, for example, Loretta Lynch authorized it, technically speaking that doesn't mean Obama did it, but it went down under his watch which is kind of the same thing. But also, "I have no information to support that claim" is...curiously noncommittal. If you recall, here's Comey testifying on whether Hillary Clinton told the truth about her private e-mail server. See how straightforward that is? I'm just saying. I think there's another shoe to drop.
Agreed, just like Hillary lied about "sniper fire" and "dead broke" lies, much less Bill's "I didn't inhale" and "did not have sexual relations with that woman" lies. It's Washington DC. They're all fucking liars....Trump lied about Obama wiretapping him. It's as simple as that. ...
There is one pretty important distinction... your other examples were two shadsters lying to cover their butts, which is wrong, no argument here. Trump took it to the next level by accusing an ex-president of a felony, calling him a bad/sick guy, and using his lie to distract the American people from some shady business going on with his administration. There are many layers of stink on this one. It needs to be called out and we need to demand better from our leaderAgreed, just like Hillary lied about "sniper fire" and "dead broke" lies, much less Bill's "I didn't inhale" and "did not have sexual relations with that woman" lies. It's Washington DC. They're all fucking liars....Trump lied about Obama wiretapping him. It's as simple as that. ...
If Russia wanted to help Trump win, why were they trying to hack the RNC?
Yep, no other way to investigate someone unless you are doing surveillance, just as trump stated!That is all that the FBI seems to be interested in discussing.facts bubba, just facts.
Why would they leave fingerprints?If Russia wanted to help Trump win, why were they trying to hack the RNC?
Leverage.
Disagreed since anyone with an average knowledge of modern technology knows the FBI doesn't sneak agents into people's homes and actually "wire tap" their phones then sit in a small room across the street listening on headphones while running reel-to-reel tape recorders. There are more modern techniques now which is why the correct technical phrase is "electronic surveillance", not the euphemism "wiretapping".There is one pretty important distinction... your other examples were two shadsters lying to cover their butts, which is wrong, no argument here. Trump took it to the next level by accusing an ex-president of a felony, calling him a bad/sick guy, and using his lie to distract the American people from some shady business going on with his administration. There are many layers of stink on this one. It needs to be called out and we need to demand better from our leader
Disagreed. Records checks and interviews, to name two, are done without surveillance.Yep, no other way to investigate someone unless you are doing surveillance, just as trump stated!That is all that the FBI seems to be interested in discussing.facts bubba, just facts.
Yes, that is pretty obvious, Obama didn't send people to put old school bugs in Trumps office. Trump accused Obama of doing something illegal in relation to surveillance on Trump tower. He called him a sick/bad guy and compared it to McCarthyism. Trump didn't have evidence to back up these tweets or we wouldn't of have the head of the FBI and NSA both saying that there was no evidence to back up Trumps tweets. All this other talk of searching for other types of surveillance is now officially a desperate attempt to find something that can shield Trump from his false statement and somehow justify it.Disagreed since anyone with an average knowledge of modern technology knows the FBI doesn't sneak agents into people's homes and actually "wire tap" their phones then sit in a small room across the street listening on headphones while running reel-to-reel tape recorders. There are more modern techniques now which is why the correct technical phrase is "electronic surveillance", not the euphemism "wiretapping".There is one pretty important distinction... your other examples were two shadsters lying to cover their butts, which is wrong, no argument here. Trump took it to the next level by accusing an ex-president of a felony, calling him a bad/sick guy, and using his lie to distract the American people from some shady business going on with his administration. There are many layers of stink on this one. It needs to be called out and we need to demand better from our leader
He's obviously hiding the facts and trying to mislead the public and congress.There are two issues I see with Comey's testimony that I haven't heard reported on:
1) Comey admitted that there was evidence to suggest Russia attempted to hack into other institutions, including the RNC. This is consistent with this story that Russia attempted to hack the RNC around the same time they hacked the DNC...they just were unsuccessful at doing so. It makes more sense that Russia wanted to create confusion in the election than simply help Trump win, which is why I take Comey and Rogers' statements that Russia wanted to hurt Hillary and help Trump with a grain of salt. If Russia wanted to help Trump win, why were they trying to hack the RNC?
2) People keep saying Comey flatly rejected Trump's tweets about Obama having him wire tapped. Couple of points with that. First of all, Comey said he's seen no information to support Trump's claim that Obama had him wiretapped. Aside from the fact that that answer doesn't completely eschew the idea that Trump was wiretapped, it's also a careful bit of word parsing. The question everyone wants to know is, "did the Obama administration have Trump surveilled during the 2016 election?" If, for example, Loretta Lynch authorized it, technically speaking that doesn't mean Obama did it, but it went down under his watch which is kind of the same thing. But also, "I have no information to support that claim" is...curiously noncommittal. If you recall, here's Comey testifying on whether Hillary Clinton told the truth about her private e-mail server. See how straightforward that is? I'm just saying. I think there's another shoe to drop.
He only there to discredit Trump and prevent Hillary and Obama from being properly investigated.
1) That's pretty obvious.Yes, that is pretty obvious, Obama didn't send people to put old school bugs in Trumps office. Trump accused Obama of doing something illegal in relation to surveillance on Trump tower. He called him a sick/bad guy and compared it to McCarthyism. Trump didn't have evidence to back up these tweets or we wouldn't of have the head of the FBI and NSA both saying that there was no evidence to back up Trumps tweets. All this other talk of searching for other types of surveillance is now officially a desperate attempt to find something that can shield Trump from his false statement and somehow justify it.
