Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

[homersapien 11,393]

3 hours ago, autigeremt said:

Not when he had a super majority. My opinion.

Sorry but I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to congress, I was talking about  "tea partiers", "alt right" - or what ever it is they call themselves other than Trump supporters.   The ones that saw Obama as trying to "destroy America".

 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

6 hours ago, homersapien said:

Everyone knows that if Obama had done this and it was being revealed in the same manner, they would  be marching on Washington and demanding his head.

The hypocrisy on this forum is breathtaking.

Indeed and I've pointed it out since the election of Trump.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

8 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

What I'm saying is, the other side's hypocrisy doesn't really have any bearing on this situation with Trump.  Every place in your quoted post above that you have the name "Trump," I could sub in "Obama" and be describing the last 8 years here.  But that doesn't answer the central question.

All I'm saying is that for right now, for you and others who voted for or like Trump - if you were willing to indulge in anonymous sources, underground blogs and offbeat news sites telling you all sorts of scary things about Obama, don't develop a sudden case of skepticism now.

I have been skeptical. I was skeptical of James Comey before Trump won the election. I thought he looked bad for his handling of Hilary's e-mail investigation. The career government cronies who protect fellow government officials or politicians they like  but stab those who they don't like in the back and then try to take them out make me very skeptical of our government officials.

I don't believe everything Trump says. I think he'll say some things  just to respond to media reports, not that he has some big narrative that he sticks to. It certainly isn't good for PR for the administration and it creates needless coverage that results in a back and forth with the media over what Trump actually thinks.

My point about McMaster isn't to say that he's the most honest person in government or that should be believed, it's that his explanation was similar to what has been leaked about Trump not knowing sources and methods. That's why I'm inclined to actually believe McMaster's explanation because it corroborates with the leaks  .......... and I absolutely consider leaks to be believable and part of finding out things no matter which side the leaks hurt. I don't just brush them off as made up. 

What those who are doing the "I told you so" about Trump right now need to do is not brush off the impact of the leaks. The leaks put out through the news media revealed as much if not more sensitive information than what Trump did. We first heard that Israel was the source of the shared classified information in the leaks from the anonymous officials in the NY Times article.

Even in the original Washington Post article that revealed Trump had shared classified info with Russia, it didn't say that he had revealed the methods or sources, just that he shared classified information. It's still not good what Trump did but the leakers made it even easier for Russia than Trump did. Now Russia doesn't even have to use their own resources to figure out the source of the info that Trump shared.. Since the anonymous officials leaked it through the news media, they did the work of revealing the source for them. 

Even though Trump has the authority, hopefully he's learned from this and won't share intelligence with Russia or other countries that are bad actors again........  Yeah, I know  ................ have fun with that last sentence..........

[TexasTiger 12,961]

17 hours ago, autigeremt said:

Not when he had a super majority. My opinion.

Pure speculation. He didn't do this things-- nothing close.

[homersapien 11,393]

13 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

I have been skeptical. I was skeptical of James Comey before Trump won the election. I thought he looked bad for his handling of Hilary's e-mail investigation. The career government cronies who protect fellow government officials or politicians they like  but stab those who they don't like in the back and then try to take them out make me very skeptical of our government officials.

I don't believe everything Trump says. I think he'll say some things  just to respond to media reports, not that he has some big narrative that he sticks to. It certainly isn't good for PR for the administration and it creates needless coverage that results in a back and forth with the media over what Trump actually thinks.

My point about McMaster isn't to say that he's the most honest person in government or that should be believed, it's that his explanation was similar to what has been leaked about Trump not knowing sources and methods. That's why I'm inclined to actually believe McMaster's explanation because it corroborates with the leaks  .......... and I absolutely consider leaks to be believable and part of finding out things no matter which side the leaks hurt. I don't just brush them off as made up. 

What those who are doing the "I told you so" about Trump right now need to do is not brush off the impact of the leaks. The leaks put out through the news media revealed as much if not more sensitive information than what Trump did. We first heard that Israel was the source of the shared classified information in the leaks from the anonymous officials in the NY Times article.

Even in the original Washington Post article that revealed Trump had shared classified info with Russia, it didn't say that he had revealed the methods or sources, just that he shared classified information. It's still not good what Trump did but the leakers made it even easier for Russia than Trump did. Now Russia doesn't even have to use their own resources to figure out the source of the info that Trump shared.. Since the anonymous officials leaked it through the news media, they did the work of revealing the source for them. 

Even though Trump has the authority, hopefully he's learned from this and won't share intelligence with Russia or other countries that are bad actors again........  Yeah, I know  ................ have fun with that last sentence..........

In other words, Trump isn't guilty as such, he's just ignorant and imcompetent.

Actually, that sounds about right.

And the Russians didn't need anything beyond what Trump told them.  Certainly not from the Press. They got it straight from the fool's mouth.

 

[autigeremt 6,652]

On 5/23/2017 at 7:15 AM, TexasTiger said:

Pure speculation. He didn't do this things-- nothing close.

I doubt we "really" know what normal adminitiations do. Trump is just so arogant that we see his flaws and transgressions out in the open.

[autigeremt 6,652]

On 5/22/2017 at 4:46 PM, homersapien said:

Sorry but I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to congress, I was talking about  "tea partiers", "alt right" - or what ever it is they call themselves other than Trump supporters.   The ones that saw Obama as trying to "destroy America".

 

Both sides have nuts...you are often blinded to that fact it seems when it comes to Democrats. Nothing abnormal about it....just the facts.

[homersapien 11,393]

19 minutes ago, autigeremt said:

Both sides have nuts...you are often blinded to that fact it seems when it comes to Democrats. Nothing abnormal about it....just the facts.

I am not aware of a liberal equivalent to the Tea Party.  I realize there is faction supporting Bernie, but nothing really like the Tea Party whose hatred of OBAMA was frequently irrational (birth certificate, Muslim background - and last but not least - being black).

And I - of course - understand that no political group is without a few nuts. I have no idea of what you are talking about when you say am "often blinded" to that fact.