Law prof. Lawrence Tribe: Falsely accusing Obama of wiretapping ‘qualifies as an impeachable offense’

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

56 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

2 things... did the NYT mean ' wire tapping ' when it wrote about ' wire tapping ' ?? 

And this goes back to my point ( Peter Theil's words, not mine  ) , that Trump opponents take him literally, not seriously, while Trump supporters take him seriously, not literally. 

I'm sorry, but that's a cop out to excuse a man who seemingly has very little knowledge about government or how it works.  That excuse gives POTUS blanket coverage to say any crazy thing he wants and then, when idiotic assertions are proven false, his supporters can say "there you go taking him literally again."

I live in the real world where words matter.  Remember when Obama said "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"?  What if he then came back and said "well you shouldn't have taken me literally on that".  You and many other folks would be throwing a fit.  Instead, Obama was held to his words and the Dems lost the Congress in 2010 largely due to that issue.  So why do the rules get to change now because Donald Trump is POTUS?

[AURaptor 1,121]

46 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I'm sorry, but that's a cop out to excuse a man who seemingly has very little knowledge about government or how it works.  That excuse gives POTUS blanket coverage to say any crazy thing he wants and then, when idiotic assertions are proven false, his supporters can say "there you go taking him literally again." (  You mean like " If you like your plan, you can keep  your plan. Period " ?  Also, I didn't come up w/ the explanation on Trump.  Google it, if you need further explanation. ) 

I live in the real world where words matter.  Remember when Obama said "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"?  What if he then came back and said "well you shouldn't have taken me literally on that". ( Yeah, I DO remember that, and if he did come back and say it, he'd at least be honest - FOR ONCE ! )  You and many other folks would be throwing a fit.  Instead, Obama was held to his words and the Dems lost the Congress in 2010 largely due to that issue.  So why do the rules get to change now because Donald Trump is POTUS?

We're still throwing fits, ( thus Hillary not winning, remember ? ) because he KNOWINGLY LIED ! Which is actually worse than getting the technical language of spying down pat. 

Let's see what happens in 2018. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

8 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

We're still throwing fits, ( thus Hillary not winning, remember ? ) because he KNOWINGLY LIED ! Which is actually worse than getting the technical language of spying down pat. 

Let's see what happens in 2018. 

Do you not realize how easy it is to say that Trump knowingly lied about this issue too?  But now, because of retroactive wordsmithing, he's trying to weasel his way out of said lie on a "technicality"?  It's a built in excuse for Trump to say what he wants and people are openly being apologists for him based on "not taking him literally".

Also, read an entire post before you comment in it.  Would make your rebuttal much more coherent.

[AURaptor 1,121]

7 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Do you not realize how easy it is to say that Trump knowingly lied about this issue too?  But now, because of retroactive wordsmithing, he's trying to weasel his way out of said lie on a "technicality"?  It's a built in excuse for Trump to say what he wants and people are openly being apologists for him based on "not taking him literally".

Also, read an entire post before you comment in it.  Would make your rebuttal much more coherent.

Wait a minute, you're trying to compare Trumps off the cuff wordsmithing on wiretapping to Obama's planned, intentional HC law , which was meant to be sold as a 100% full and total lie to the American public ? 

Where is Obama's " built in excuse " ??? Republicans didn't vote for it because they're RACIST ??? 

I'll read and react to posts as I want. Deal w/ it . 

[TitanTiger 20,468]

2 hours ago, AURaptor said:

2 things... did the NYT mean ' wire tapping ' when it wrote about ' wire tapping ' ?? 

And this goes back to my point ( Peter Theil's words, not mine  ) , that Trump opponents take him literally, not seriously, while Trump supporters take him seriously, not literally. 

This is rather convenient. Make outlandish claims with no proof. Walk it back later when your bluff gets called and say you weren't being literal. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

10 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

Wait a minute, you're trying to compare Trumps off the cuff wordsmithing on wiretapping to Obama's planned, intentional HC law , which was meant to be sold as a 100% full and total lie to the American public ? 

Where is Obama's " built in excuse " ??? Republicans didn't vote for it because they're RACIST ??? 

I'll read and react to posts as I want. Deal w/ it . 

Off the cuff?  He tweeted a conspiracy theory without any sort of proof.  To tweet something, one must log into a twitter account, type out those thoughts, and then actually hit the send button.  That takes forethought and effort.  As for Obama, I never said he had an excuse.  In fact, I distinctly said the Dem party suffered the consequences of the ACA in 2010 and was accountable for the words he spoke in regards to it.

Dear Lord the lengths you will go to defend stupidity are astounding.

[AURaptor 1,121]

5 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

This is rather convenient. Make outlandish claims with no proof. Walk it back later when your bluff gets called and say you weren't being literal. 

one more time, because so far, it hasn't quite sunk in yet...

 

Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel appeared at the National Press Club on Monday for a chat about his preferred presidential candidate — Donald Trump — and his central role on bringing about the shuttering of Gawker, among other topics. As CNN has taught us, it is impossible to stick up for Trump without veering into wholly untenable and far-fetched arguments. Even though Thiel is more thoughtful and measured than the Trumpites on cable news, he failed to avoid this dynamic.

Thomas Burr, president of the National Press Club, asked Thiel what he thought about Trump’s proposal to ban Muslim entry into the United States. Showing a bit of independent thinking, Thiel responded that he doesn’t support a “religious test” and expressed misgivings with Trump’s language. Then came the defense: “But I think one thing that should be distinguished here is that the media always has taken Trump literally. It never takes him seriously, but it always takes him literally.”

It’s quite the opposite for Trump voters, argued Thiel: “I think a lot of the voters who vote for Trump take Trump seriously but not literally. And so when they hear things like the Muslim comment or the wall comment or things like that, the question is not ‘Are you going to build a wall like the Great Wall of China?’ or, you know, ‘How exactly are you going to enforce these tests?’ What they hear is ‘We’re going to have a saner, more sensible immigration policy.’ ‘We’re going to try to figure out how do we strike the right balance between costs and benefits.’ ”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/10/31/peter-thiels-media-critique-reporters-take-trumps-statements-literally-but-not-seriously/?utm_term=.ab964156a31e

[AUDub 11,131]

I wish we could somehow code a rainbow blinky in big bold impact font at the bottom of every one of Raptor's posts that reads "THIS IS WHAT RAPTOR ACTUALLY BELIEVES"

[AURaptor 1,121]

3 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Off the cuff?  He tweeted a conspiracy theory.  To tweet something, one must log into a twitter account, type out those thoughts, and then actually hit the send button.  That takes forethought.  As for Obama, I never said he had an excuse.  In fact, I distinctly said the Dem party suffered the consequences of the ACA in 2010 and was accountable for the words he spoke in regards to it.

Dear Lord the lengths you will go to defend stupidity are astounding.

No it doesn't. Do you even HAVE a titter account ? Do you even REMOTELY follow the nonsense that folks tweet out, on a whim, and then have to TRY and delete it, only to find out the hard truth that, once it's OUT there, in the twitter-verse, it's out there for all eternity ?? People fire off angry , goofy  , off the cuff comments ALL THE TIME ! 

ex coach Herm Edwards even had these simple words to tell NFL rookies... " Don't Press Send ! " 

 

 

 

Yeah, it's a thing. And not something just Trump has to deal with either. 

[AURaptor 1,121]

5 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

I wish we could somehow code a rainbow blinky in big bold impact font at the bottom of every one of Raptor's posts that reads "THIS IS WHAT RAPTOR ACTUALLY BELIEVES"

Why do you come at me when all I do is show you things you apparently are ignorant to and some how it's MY crime you didn't know  about them ?? 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

10 minutes ago, Bigbens42 said:

I wish we could somehow code a rainbow blinky in big bold impact font at the bottom of every one of Raptor's posts that reads "THIS IS WHAT RAPTOR ACTUALLY BELIEVES"

I repeat:  the lengths he will go to defend stupidity are astounding.

[AURaptor 1,121]

11 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I repeat:  the lengths he will go to defend stupidity are astounding.

What " length " did I go to ?

Be specific. 

 

And Brad, DO you have a twitter account ? Just curious.  

[AUUSN 823]

Trump wrote, forget tweeted, that Obama had him wiretapped and called him a bad and sick guy. 

That's not an off the cuff comment.

[AURaptor 1,121]

Just now, AUUSN said:

Trump wrote, forget tweeted, that Obama had him wiretapped and called him a bad and sick guy. 

That's not an off the cuff comment.

It absolutely is. 

And it is utterly insignificant compared to the massive lie and cover up that was ObamaCare, which cost over a trillion dollars and had to be passed using every congressional trick in the book , including pay offs to elected officials in the forms of kick backs and special dispensations to those who were friendly to the administration. 

[AUUSN 823]

He accused Obama of committing a felony. He specifically wrote that he 'tapp' his phones. That is not off the cuff, that is a declarative statement.

[AUUSN 823]

off the cuff

phrase of cuff

 

1. 1.

   informal

   without preparation.

   "they posed some difficult questions to answer off the cuff"

[AURaptor 1,121]

5 minutes ago, AUUSN said:

He accused Obama of committing a felony. He specifically wrote that he 'tapp' his phones. That is not off the cuff, that is a declarative statement.

Off the cuff, took probably 30 seconds to think of, type and send. Boom! Done 

 

Off the cuff.

 

ETA - And why did it take you 2 replies to post 2 different thoughts on the same topic ? Can't come back and edit ? 

[AUUSN 823]

It was a prepared and deliberate comment. There was nothing off the cuff about it.

[AURaptor 1,121]

2 minutes ago, AUUSN said:

It was a prepared and deliberate comment. There was nothing off the cuff about it.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

56 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

What " length " did I go to ?

Be specific. 

 

And Brad, DO you have a twitter account ? Just curious.  

I used to have a twitter account.  Don't mess with it anymore because I have better things to do.  But yes, when I did have one, I had to log in, type, and then hit send.  So a three step process to actually put out my thoughts.  There was plenty of time for me to stop that process if I so chose to.

The lengths I'm talking about are this conversation exactly.  You're trying to spin a 3-step process into being "off-the-cuff" just to defend an idiotic tweet from POTUS that had zero credibility, all because you apparently don't want to be seen as being on the wrong end of this.  There's obvious intent by POTUS here, but again you're defending it by saying (and I quote) "People fire off angry , goofy  , off the cuff comments ALL THE TIME ! "

Here's the problem with that line of thinking: Donald J. Trump isn't a regular person and shouldn't be held to the same standard as that of Phyllis from Mulga.  He's the leader of freakin' United States of America and asking him to live up to his words, like you loved to do with Obama (hello "this is my house" debate), shouldn't be something that we haggle over.  And before you go there, I realize that you personally did not write the opinion piece.  But you are using it to defend Trump's actions when you said it goes back to "my point" by using Peter Theil's words.

Last thing.  Unnecessarily capitalizing all the letters in a word doesn't make your point sound smarter.  It just comes across as the thoughts of a ranting madman.

[AURaptor 1,121]

2 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Last thing.  Unnecessarily capitalizing all the letters in a word doesn't make your point sound smarter.  It just comes across as the thoughts of a ranting madman.

Tell that to * AUUNS

 

( despite your wordy reply, you missed my point , entirely. )

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

3 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

I'm sorry, but that's a cop out to excuse a man who seemingly has very little knowledge about government or how it works.  That excuse gives POTUS blanket coverage to say any crazy thing he wants and then, when idiotic assertions are proven false, his supporters can say "there you go taking him literally again."

I live in the real world where words matter.  Remember when Obama said "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor"?  What if he then came back and said "well you shouldn't have taken me literally on that".  You and many other folks would be throwing a fit.  Instead, Obama was held to his words and the Dems lost the Congress in 2010 largely due to that issue.  So why do the rules get to change now because Donald Trump is POTUS?

Obama knowingly lied. People have thrown a fit. At the voting booth. Who pays attention to rules? barry really lowered that bar.

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

1 hour ago, AURaptor said:

Tell that to Gilligan 

( despite your wordy reply, you missed my point , entirely. )

I received a stern warning about use of the name Gilligan. May I suggest Mary Ann or Ginger. A lot of sensitivity here Raptor. 

[AUUSN 823]

 

[TitanTiger 20,468]

14 hours ago, AURaptor said:

one more time, because so far, it hasn't quite sunk in yet...

 

Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel appeared at the National Press Club on Monday for a chat about his preferred presidential candidate — Donald Trump — and his central role on bringing about the shuttering of Gawker, among other topics. As CNN has taught us, it is impossible to stick up for Trump without veering into wholly untenable and far-fetched arguments. Even though Thiel is more thoughtful and measured than the Trumpites on cable news, he failed to avoid this dynamic.

Thomas Burr, president of the National Press Club, asked Thiel what he thought about Trump’s proposal to ban Muslim entry into the United States. Showing a bit of independent thinking, Thiel responded that he doesn’t support a “religious test” and expressed misgivings with Trump’s language. Then came the defense: “But I think one thing that should be distinguished here is that the media always has taken Trump literally. It never takes him seriously, but it always takes him literally.”

It’s quite the opposite for Trump voters, argued Thiel: “I think a lot of the voters who vote for Trump take Trump seriously but not literally. And so when they hear things like the Muslim comment or the wall comment or things like that, the question is not ‘Are you going to build a wall like the Great Wall of China?’ or, you know, ‘How exactly are you going to enforce these tests?’ What they hear is ‘We’re going to have a saner, more sensible immigration policy.’ ‘We’re going to try to figure out how do we strike the right balance between costs and benefits.’ ”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/10/31/peter-thiels-media-critique-reporters-take-trumps-statements-literally-but-not-seriously/?utm_term=.ab964156a31e

Oh, it has sunk in.  I just think it's mostly bull**** to cover for the fact that he just says whatever harebrained nutjob theory that pops into his head.