|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
In case anyone cares about tracking approval:
1) 538 aggregator has him at his highest disapprove yet (54.1), and almost lowest approve (39.9)
2) Gallup has him edging down a bit, but still not quite at his nadir
3) Rasmussen who started him off at 56 approve/44 disapprove (far above everyone else) now has him at their lowest point, 43 approve/57 disapprove.
It really is wearing on a lot of voters, even Republicans.
Edit: Also, looks like Comey is getting the public testimony he wanted: Graham has now invited him.
|
United States43964 Posts
On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:03 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:01 NewSunshine wrote:On May 17 2017 04:58 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 04:55 NewSunshine wrote:[quote] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html?smid=tw-shareThe information is believed to be pertaining to ISIS, but beyond that we don't know. Whether or not Russia deliberately uses it against Israel is beside the point, it's very sensitive information that was classified for a reason. The fact that it's out due to Trump's incompetence means Israel has little reason to trust us going forward, as do a lot of other countries. But make this about liberals, please. Your partisanship is showing. Is there one liberal around here who understands that I'm not the one making the argument that the information should be spun one way or another? Has this thread really fallen this far? And do you assume, just by me interpreting the information I have before me, that I am a liberal? I'm criticizing a grossly incompetent leader who deserves it by every measure I can think of, that doesn't make me a Democratic shill. You're the one projecting here. The situation looks awful no matter how you want to spin it, and you refuse to acknowledge it. There's nothing baseless about my presumption. Here are you are presuming that Trump's disclosure of the intelligence is another act of gross incompetence. It's pretty clear to me what you're doing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... enlighten me please, what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics.
Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse.
|
On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:03 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:01 NewSunshine wrote:On May 17 2017 04:58 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Is there one liberal around here who understands that I'm not the one making the argument that the information should be spun one way or another? Has this thread really fallen this far? And do you assume, just by me interpreting the information I have before me, that I am a liberal? I'm criticizing a grossly incompetent leader who deserves it by every measure I can think of, that doesn't make me a Democratic shill. You're the one projecting here. The situation looks awful no matter how you want to spin it, and you refuse to acknowledge it. There's nothing baseless about my presumption. Here are you are presuming that Trump's disclosure of the intelligence is another act of gross incompetence. It's pretty clear to me what you're doing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... enlighten me please, what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse.
Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up.
|
Who supports this douchebag?
|
United States43964 Posts
On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:03 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:01 NewSunshine wrote:
[quote]
And do you assume, just by me interpreting the information I have before me, that I am a liberal? I'm criticizing a grossly incompetent leader who deserves it by every measure I can think of, that doesn't make me a Democratic shill. You're the one projecting here. The situation looks awful no matter how you want to spin it, and you refuse to acknowledge it. There's nothing baseless about my presumption. Here are you are presuming that Trump's disclosure of the intelligence is another act of gross incompetence. It's pretty clear to me what you're doing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... enlighten me please, what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up.
Which part to you dispute? That Flynn was a foreign agent, that the White House kept him in his position after finding out that he was a foreign agent, or that the White House fired him after it leaked that he was a foreign agent and they knew about it?
|
On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:03 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:01 NewSunshine wrote:
[quote]
And do you assume, just by me interpreting the information I have before me, that I am a liberal? I'm criticizing a grossly incompetent leader who deserves it by every measure I can think of, that doesn't make me a Democratic shill. You're the one projecting here. The situation looks awful no matter how you want to spin it, and you refuse to acknowledge it. There's nothing baseless about my presumption. Here are you are presuming that Trump's disclosure of the intelligence is another act of gross incompetence. It's pretty clear to me what you're doing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... enlighten me please, what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up.
Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them.
|
United States43964 Posts
On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:03 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
There's nothing baseless about my presumption. Here are you are presuming that Trump's disclosure of the intelligence is another act of gross incompetence. It's pretty clear to me what you're doing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... enlighten me please, what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them.
They probably just didn't get around to firing him between when they were told and the leaks. Probably wasn't a pressing concern for them. They were going to fire him on that day anyway and the leaks didn't change anything. That's why they made those public statements expressing confidence in him right before they fired him.
xDaunt has completely lost the plot at this point. He's gone full Spicey. These inauguration crowds were the biggest in history. RIP those killed in the Bowling Green Massacre. No puppet, you're a puppet!
|
On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:03 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
There's nothing baseless about my presumption. Here are you are presuming that Trump's disclosure of the intelligence is another act of gross incompetence. It's pretty clear to me what you're doing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... enlighten me please, what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them.
Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities.
|
|
|
On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
[quote]
enlighten me please,
what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities.
Your willful ignorance is neither a defense for Trump nor an effective rejoinder to facts in evidence.
“We had just gone and told them that the national security adviser, of all people, was compromised with the Russians and that their vice-president and others had been lying to the American people about it,” Yates told the New Yorker, referring to statements about Flynn’s Russia connections by the then incoming vice-president, Mike Pence. “We expected them to act.” She added: “We expected them to do something immediately.”
In a second interview released Tuesday, Yates said that Flynn, in his clandestine contacts with Russian operatives, had possibly committed a crime or crimes.
“There’s certainly a criminal statute that was implicated by his conduct,” Yates told CNN’s Anderson Cooper.
“I think that this was a serious compromise situation, that the Russians had real leverage,” she told CNN. “He also had lied to the vice-president of the United States. You know, whether he’s fired or not is a decision for the president of the United States to make. But it doesn’t seem like that’s a person who should be sitting in the national security adviser position.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/16/sally-yates-russia-michael-flynn-trump
|
On May 17 2017 09:16 Wulfey_LA wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities. Your willful ignorance is neither a defense for Trump nor an effective rejoinder to facts in evidence. Show nested quote +“We had just gone and told them that the national security adviser, of all people, was compromised with the Russians and that their vice-president and others had been lying to the American people about it,” Yates told the New Yorker, referring to statements about Flynn’s Russia connections by the then incoming vice-president, Mike Pence. “We expected them to act.” She added: “We expected them to do something immediately.”
In a second interview released Tuesday, Yates said that Flynn, in his clandestine contacts with Russian operatives, had possibly committed a crime or crimes.
“There’s certainly a criminal statute that was implicated by his conduct,” Yates told CNN’s Anderson Cooper.
“I think that this was a serious compromise situation, that the Russians had real leverage,” she told CNN. “He also had lied to the vice-president of the United States. You know, whether he’s fired or not is a decision for the president of the United States to make. But it doesn’t seem like that’s a person who should be sitting in the national security adviser position.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/16/sally-yates-russia-michael-flynn-trump
Yates is a hack. I don't see anything unreasonable about taking a few weeks to corroborate her story on Flynn.
|
United States43964 Posts
On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
[quote]
enlighten me please,
what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities.
So your proposed timeline is as follows
Trump is told that his National Security Adviser is a foreign agent.
Trump continues to let his compromised National Security Adviser serve as National Security Adviser.
Trump decides to fire his National Security Adviser but doesn't actually fire him yet.
Trump continues to let his foreign agent National Security Adviser sit in national security briefings.
Trump publicly backs his National Security Adviser (foreign agent) and expresses his full confidence in him.
It is leaked that the National Security Adviser is a foreign agent.
Trump fires his National Security Adviser the way he always planned to do whether or not the leaks happened.
As an individual who claims to be a lawyer on the internet and might even pretend to be one in real life, how well do you think that narrative would go with a jury?
|
United States43964 Posts
On May 17 2017 09:18 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:16 Wulfey_LA wrote:On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities. Your willful ignorance is neither a defense for Trump nor an effective rejoinder to facts in evidence. “We had just gone and told them that the national security adviser, of all people, was compromised with the Russians and that their vice-president and others had been lying to the American people about it,” Yates told the New Yorker, referring to statements about Flynn’s Russia connections by the then incoming vice-president, Mike Pence. “We expected them to act.” She added: “We expected them to do something immediately.”
In a second interview released Tuesday, Yates said that Flynn, in his clandestine contacts with Russian operatives, had possibly committed a crime or crimes.
“There’s certainly a criminal statute that was implicated by his conduct,” Yates told CNN’s Anderson Cooper.
“I think that this was a serious compromise situation, that the Russians had real leverage,” she told CNN. “He also had lied to the vice-president of the United States. You know, whether he’s fired or not is a decision for the president of the United States to make. But it doesn’t seem like that’s a person who should be sitting in the national security adviser position.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/16/sally-yates-russia-michael-flynn-trump Yates is a hack. I don't see anything unreasonable about taking a few weeks to corroborate her story on Flynn.
And giving him the benefit of the doubt in the mean time? I feel like if I was President and I was told that my National Security Adviser was a foreign agent by the intelligence community then not only would probably ask him to take a few days off while I looked into that. Rather than just assuming it's probably nothing.
|
On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:05 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
[quote]
enlighten me please,
what else could it be? In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities.
Umm. Without the leaks, how on earth would Flynn have become a political liability? That's the world we're discussing.
|
You're simply dishonest, you've jumped the shark of partisan bias, if you think Trump was only innocently saying "I hope".
Comey was in the Oval Office briefing the President along with the vice president and attorney general on February 14, according to a source close to Comey who has a copy of the memo. After the briefing, Trump "asked Sessions and Pence to leave," the source told CNN.
According to a memo, Comey wrote about the encounter and shared with confidantes, the President said: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."
www.cnn.com
|
On May 17 2017 09:23 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:On May 17 2017 05:08 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
In a vacuum, what would be wrong with Trump sharing information with Russia that Russia was about to be attacked by ISIS? It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities. Umm. Without the leaks, how on earth would Flynn have become a political liability? That's the world we're discussing.
How could Trump think that it wouldn't get out when he is being given the heads up by Yates and when his administration is already leaking like a sieve?
|
United States43964 Posts
On May 17 2017 09:26 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:23 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities. Umm. Without the leaks, how on earth would Flynn have become a political liability? That's the world we're discussing. How could Trump think that it wouldn't get out when he is being given the heads up by Yates and when his administration is already leaking like a sieve?
Ah yes, the 7D water polo argument. Trump couldn't possibly be pressured into changing his decision by the leaks coming out because Trump knew it would leak ahead of time and therefore the leak was already taken into account and therefore whatever Trump did was what Trump was always going to do because Trump decided what to do in the light of the leaks before the leaks happened because he knew they would happen but what makes it really clever is the question of whether the leaks would have even happened had Trump not insisted on keeping the compromised National Security Adviser in on the national security briefings so Trump actually caused the leaks because he wanted them all along because what Trump actually wanted was the appearance that he only fired his adviser after it leaked because that's how you win water polo.
The argument comes down to "Trump is too smart to have done something with the appearance of wrongdoing so the only way this thing which definitely looks a lot like wrongdoing could possibly have happened is if there was definitely no wrongdoing at all".
|
On May 17 2017 09:25 Doodsmack wrote:You're simply dishonest, you've jumped the shark of partisan bias, if you think Trump was only innocently saying "I hope". Show nested quote +Comey was in the Oval Office briefing the President along with the vice president and attorney general on February 14, according to a source close to Comey who has a copy of the memo. After the briefing, Trump "asked Sessions and Pence to leave," the source told CNN.
According to a memo, Comey wrote about the encounter and shared with confidantes, the President said: "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go." www.cnn.com
I didn't say Trump was innocent. In fact, I specifically said that I wouldn't be surprised if evidence did come out showing that Trump fired Comey to impede the investigation. Pay attention.
|
On May 17 2017 09:26 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:23 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities. Umm. Without the leaks, how on earth would Flynn have become a political liability? That's the world we're discussing. How could Trump think that it wouldn't get out when he is being given the heads up by Yates and when his administration is already leaking like a sieve?
And yet, knowing it will get out that Flynn is a foreign agent, he (Trump) then proceeds to publicly announce his support for Flynn?
Am I getting this right?
|
On May 17 2017 09:26 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2017 09:23 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:12 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:09 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 17 2017 09:07 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 09:01 KwarK wrote:On May 17 2017 05:25 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:20 Tachion wrote:On May 17 2017 05:16 xDaunt wrote:On May 17 2017 05:11 Mohdoo wrote:
[quote]
It would give away methods and routes of intelligence. Russia is deeply invested in knowing the inner workings of Israeli intelligence. Having little clues here and there, in addition to what Russia already has, would likely allow Russia to confirm/deny underlying assumptions and to build a more complete model as to Israel's capabilities, current pursuits, positioning, etc. Not necessarily. It depends upon what Trump told Russia. Saying "we are hearing that Russia is going to be attacked" is very different than "Russia is going to be attacked and this is how we know it [and what follows is a full disclosure of the source of the intelligence]." This my big problem with these leaks. We don't know what was shared, so all that's left is innuendo. And it's the innuendo that is being reported on and seized by the public. Regardless of what Trump actually told the Russians, why would any intelligence agency share anything with the US when it can see that our intelligence apparatus is leaking like a sieve? Do you realize by now that the leaks are just a symptom, and that Trump is the cause? The frequency of leaks with this administration is absolutely incredible. Can you see why that is? What has Trump actually done to warrant the leaks? What specific leak has been justified? Which leak has divulged information showing that Trump should be impeached? I keep waiting for something significant to come out, but it hasn't happened. For that reason, I can't help but think that this is all politics. Flynn only got fired because of the leaks. The Trump White House knew that their national security advisor was a foreign agent but felt like that wasn't a problem. I'm amazed you're this obtuse. Everyone is going to seem obtuse when you make shit up. Do you think Flynn was going to be fired/resign without the leaks, then? That's an interesting conclusion. It isn't as though the White House gained any information from them. Who knows? Trump may have. Trump isn't afraid to can people whom he perceives to be political liabilities. Umm. Without the leaks, how on earth would Flynn have become a political liability? That's the world we're discussing. How could Trump think that it wouldn't get out when he is being given the heads up by Yates and when his administration is already leaking like a sieve?
If that's the case, wouldn't he have fired him *before* the leaks? Was it just a happy coincidence?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
