Please do not hijack this thread with discussion about posting privileges or related commentary. As a reminder, questions or complaints about moderation belong in ATMB.
[/moderating]
Can/should Congress make it condition that there will be no investigations of the accuser refuses to cooperate?
There IS a penalty for the sort of game Bannon et al are playing (the ‘please investigate this, but we won’t help you’ game)—it’s called “Voters Catching On to the Scam.”
It happens only very rarely.
Bannon is quite right to stretch out the game: while everyone is talking about the Administration’s failures to cooperate in the very investigation the Administration called for, no one is talking about the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.
Why does that surprise you? The poster in question apparently has issues with paragraphing.
Wait, Congress is going to $pay themselves?
I’d declare “Darwin Awards all 'round,” but most of them have already managed to, er, ‘contribute’ to the gene pool.
Ask and ye shall receive.
Spicer has come up with a corollary to Ben Bradlee’s famous ‘non-denial denial.’ I call it the non-affirmative affirmative:
Senator: Comey to say whether FBI probing Russia, Trump campaign by Wednesday
[QUOTE=CNN]
The White House has vacillated on Trump’s claims in the last two days. Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Monday that Trump did not mean literally that Obama had him wiretapped. But on Tuesday, Spicer said Trump was “extremely confident” he would be vindicated by the evidence.
“I think there’s significant reporting about surveillance techniques that existed throughout the 2016 election,” White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said, without providing any examples.
[/QUOTE]
Guess what? They existed long before the 2016 election. He’s basically saying nothing (which, at this point, is better than the drivel he’s been spouting up to now, but only marginally) while attempting to imply everything.
Trump’s evidence for his wiretapping claim? He has none. Some gibberish about some talking head and some news articles (by FAKE NEWS sources, according to Trump), and that’s it.
Reading Trump’s statements makes it even clearer than just listening to them that he has no idea what he’s talking about. Things? Really?
“I had been reading about things,” he told Carlson.
“There were** other things**,” he continued. “I watched your friend Brett Baier the day previous, where he was talking about certain very complex sets of things happening, and wiretapping. I said, ‘Wait a minute, there’s a lot of wiretapping being talked about.’ I’ve been** seeing a lot of things**. Now, for the most part, I’m not going to discuss it, because we have it before the committee and we will be** submitting things **before the committee very soon that hasn’t been submitted as of yet. But it’s potentially a very serious issue."
“Because I don’t want to do anything that’s going to violate any strength of an agency,” he said, before changing topics briefly. “You know, we have enough problems. And by the way, with the CIA, I just want people to know, the CIA was hacked and** a lot of things **taken…"
“But we will be submitting** certain things** and I will be perhaps speaking about this next week, but it’s right now before the committee and I think I want to leave it there,” he said. “I have a lot of confidence in the committee.”
“I do, I do, but I think that frankly we have a lot right now,” Trump said. “And I think if you watched the Brett Baier and what he was saying, and what he was talking about, and how he mentioned the word wiretap, you would feel very confident that you could mention the name. He mentioned it. And other people have mentioned it. But if you take a look at **some of the things **written about wiretapping and eavesdropping…"
“And don’t forget, when I say ‘wiretap,’ those words are in quotes,” he continued. “That really covers – because wiretapping is pretty old-fashioned stuff. But that really covers surveillance and many other things. And nobody ever talks about the fact that it was in quotes, but that’s a very** important thing**. But ‘wiretap’ covers a lot of different things. I think you’re going to find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks.”
Which sounds an awful lot like his statements about the “amazing things” he was going to provide regarding Obama’s birth certificate. Which strangely never materialized.
That transcript MikeF quoted reads like the ramblings of a scatter-brained moron. How can anyone take this man seriously?
Oh, look. It appears the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee said they saw no evidence to support President Donald Trump’s claim that the Obama administration tapped his phones during the 2016 presidential campaign.
God, do you think Trump lied??
It’s not a lie if you believe it
Trump may be easily confused and convinced.
This is totally unsurprising. He watches second-rate news coverage, choosing channels that support his preconceptions, and Tweets about it.
We’ve had posters around here whose posting history is like that, and they often get banned or topic-banned. They always get mocked. Difference is, they lack the nuclear launch codes.
This make perfect sense to 63 million voters…
I. Just. Can’t.
Fuckin’ hell!!
He either suffers from mental illness, is unable to parse information in a logical way, is a pathological liar or a combination of all three and more that I haven’t thought to mention.
By no measure is qualified to hold the office of President of the United States.
That’s exactly what he sounded like during the Clinton debates, too. I still harbor amazement that he actually won.
I think we should put the word “debate” into quotations, there was hardly any formal exchange of intelligent ideas in any of those “debates”