Trump denies exposing secret Iran paper in heated interview with Bret Baier – latest news

[ThailandRyan]

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Also from the same interview, Trump tying himself up in knots over saying he would pardon Alice Johnson over drug offences but then being confronted by Bret that under Trump's new proposals she would be executed!

 

Trump touts pardoning first-time nonviolent drug offender Alice Johnson and says she got “treated terribly,” but then Bret Baier points out Johnson would get the death penalty under his new proposal. 
"No, no, no. Under my, oh, under that? Uh, it would depend on the severity."

 

 

He has no idea of what his proposals are and how they affect others until they are pointed out to him. I think he might be facing a crisis of instability.  The stress has definitely played on his memories.

[BritManToo]

20 minutes ago, pomchop said:

There are still millions who think he won the 2020 election not that they have a shred of evidence and in spite of 60 court cases tossed, recount after recount by mostly republican officials.  No rational person could possibly believe that if there was any  evidence of significant voter fraud that it would not have long ago been brought to light....yet they still cling to the BIG LIE because Trump told them so.  If that is not delusional then I frankly don't know what else to call it.

Any election, where the outcome is reversed by postal votes counted AFTER the in person votes have been counted must be considered suspect IMHO.

[ozimoron]

59 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Not pro-Trump, but ..............

If the President of the USA can't view and share their countries secrets it just seems wrong.

Surely it's all up to him?

 

If I were president, my defense would be, "They're my secrets to do with what I will"

He was not president at the time despite the quaint US habit of calling officials by their one time titles forever.

[In Full Agreement]

 

 

I better watch  that Trump/demential video again to understand the back story on this.

 

Surely Mr. Dump  (#45, one and out) must wish he could redo the interview but since every word he speaks is precious to him, he'd probably  let it stand.

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Any election, where the outcome is reversed by postal votes counted AFTER the in person votes have been counted must be considered suspect IMHO.

It's been a feature of every election ever held in the US at least. It's the reason that Trump railed against the mail in vote. You will note that your talking points are out of date as Trump is now encouraging mail in voting after realizing that his ploy worked against him.

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/15/politics/trump-republicans-mail-in-voting/index.html

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, In Full Agreement said:

I better watch  that Trump/demential video again to understand the back story on this.

 

Surely Mr. Dump  (#45, one and out) must wish he could redo the interview but since every word he speaks is precious to him, he'd probably  let it stand.

He'll be asked about it again on the stand.

[placnx]

9 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Any election, where the outcome is reversed by postal votes counted AFTER the in person votes have been counted must be considered suspect IMHO.

For a vote to be counted it has to be postmarked, etc, before the election.

[BritManToo]

4 minutes ago, placnx said:

For a vote to be counted it has to be postmarked, etc, before the election.

I'm betting I could get a few thousand empty unsealed envelopes postmarked fairly easily.

[ozimoron]

Just now, BritManToo said:

I'm betting I could get a few thousand empty unsealed envelopes postmarked fairly easily.

More conspiracy garbage.

[onthedarkside]

Trolling meme removed

[Hanaguma]

Wouldn't call myself a Trump supporter this time around. Liked him in 2016 and liked what he did to the country in his first term. But now, he is old news and there are far better candidates that can carry the conservative message.

Note- Brett Baier did an excellent job. He is a good jounalist and manages to keep his own prejudices well concealed when he is interviewing someone. Trump looked bad. Still wants to re-litigate 2020 instead of articulating a positive case as to why voters should choose him again now. 

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Wouldn't call myself a Trump supporter this time around. Liked him in 2016 and liked what he did to the country in his first term. But now, he is old news and there are far better candidates that can carry the conservative message.

Note- Brett Baier did an excellent job. He is a good jounalist and manages to keep his own prejudices well concealed when he is interviewing someone. Trump looked bad. Still wants to re-litigate 2020 instead of articulating a positive case as to why voters should choose him again now. 

Indeed. You are a case in point of Trump losing the support of his base. Realization that he can't / won't win is setting in. Unfortunately the GOP has chosen the outside barrier by hanging on too long.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

I DID enjoy the section where Bret just plain smacked him in the face for denying he lost the election. Mwuhahaha!

The bigger issue is FOX is now backing Trump criminality as being more newsworthy.

 

FOX views are now being treated to Trump’s lies being called out and his criminality bro g openly discussed on their favorite news channel.

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Wouldn't call myself a Trump supporter this time around. Liked him in 2016 and liked what he did to the country in his first term. But now, he is old news and there are far better candidates that can carry the conservative message.

Note- Brett Baier did an excellent job. He is a good jounalist and manages to keep his own prejudices well concealed when he is interviewing someone. Trump looked bad. Still wants to re-litigate 2020 instead of articulating a positive case as to why voters should choose him again now. 

And yet nothing has changed about Trump, he’s exactly who and what many of us have always said he is.

 

But you make a valid point, moving on from Trump is a thing.

 

The problem is the GOP can’t move on and are increasingly seen as enablers and excusers of his criminality.

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Chomper Higgot

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The bigger issue is FOX is now backing Trump criminality as being more newsworthy.

 

FOX views are now being treated to Trump’s lies being called out and his criminality bro g openly discussed on their favorite news channel.

They don't want to be the rats that went down with the sinking ship. Now, belatedly trying to clean up their act and look "fair and balanced".

Edited June 21, 2023 by ozimoron

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, ozimoron said:

They don't want to be the rats that went down with the sinking ship.

When I said a few days back that Trump’s ratings would change, the cause I had in mind was the likes of FOX finally being in a position where they see the bigger/better selling news to be Trump’s crimes.

 

It’s now happening.

[Lacessit]

The interview demonstrated Trump throwing in his usual denials, deflections and irrelevant distractions. If that's what happens with a journalist, imagine what a prosecution lawyer is going to do to him.

IMO his lawyers will do everything they can to keep him from being cross-examined.

[Hanaguma]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Indeed. You are a case in point of Trump losing the support of his base. Realization that he can't / won't win is setting in. Unfortunately the GOP has chosen the outside barrier by hanging on too long.

For me, in 2016 he was the case of the best of two bad options. No way in hell would I have wanted Hillary to be President. At that time, Trump was a breath of fresh air into a stagnant political scene.  And he did better than I expected he would to be honest. 

 

2020 seemed more of the same. No way in hell did I want Biden to win. 

 

But those days are long past. The GOP has some very good candidates running, many of whom would easily beat Biden in 2024. I have a sneaking suspicion that, if the GOP nominate someone other than Trump, the Democrats would find a way to ease Biden away from the nomination and replace him Ditto Harris, no way would she ever be given the nomination, given her dismal performance as VP. But getting ahead of ourselves here. 

[Lacessit]

2 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

For me, in 2016 he was the case of the best of two bad options. No way in hell would I have wanted Hillary to be President. At that time, Trump was a breath of fresh air into a stagnant political scene.  And he did better than I expected he would to be honest. 

 

2020 seemed more of the same. No way in hell did I want Biden to win. 

 

But those days are long past. The GOP has some very good candidates running, many of whom would easily beat Biden in 2024. I have a sneaking suspicion that, if the GOP nominate someone other than Trump, the Democrats would find a way to ease Biden away from the nomination and replace him Ditto Harris, no way would she ever be given the nomination, given her dismal performance as VP. But getting ahead of ourselves here. 

LOL, if anybody has been getting ahead of themselves on the various Trump threads, it's been you.

A breath of fresh air? More like the miasma coming off a cesspool.

Trump said he was going to drain the swamp. All he really did was replace the alligators with crocodiles.

[scorecard]

4 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Not televising the trial would be a hit on free speech. The public have a right to know the full facts of this matter as it is decidedly in the public interest.

And hopefully both the prosecution and the judge will demand he prove every one of his 'facts' which will of coursebe impossible because he only tells lies.

 

Jail for the rest of his natural life, no chance of parole please. 

[Hanaguma]

21 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

LOL, if anybody has been getting ahead of themselves on the various Trump threads, it's been you.

A breath of fresh air? More like the miasma coming off a cesspool.

Trump said he was going to drain the swamp. All he really did was replace the alligators with crocodiles.

Have to disagree with you there (unsurprisingly). I just get a bit tired of the constant and reflexive "but Trump...." whenever another politician is mentioned or criticized even in the gentlest possible way.  You can see almost any discussion get derailed easily by falling down that particular rabbit hole. IMHO there should be a similar rule to Godwin's Law, except with respect to injecting Trump into discussions where he has no need to be. 

 

As I said, he had a good first term but after that... the wheels came off.  I can only hope that my good cousins to the south come to their collective senses and nominate two different people for their respective parties in 2024. 

[Walker88]

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Not pro-Trump, but ..............

If the President of the USA can't view and share their countries secrets it just seems wrong.

Surely it's all up to him?

 

If I were president, my defense would be, "They're my secrets to do with what I will"

No, he cannot share them indiscriminately, even when he was still POTUS.

 

I've repeated this ad nauseum, but even a competent POTUS is not fully aware of the harm revealing classified material can do. That is why there is a process to declassify. None of that "in my mind I declassified", as agency chiefs must be able to view, redact if necessary, and not sign on if they wholeheartedly disagree. trump is/was hardly competent, so he was a particular loose cannon.

 

Finally, what possible purpose would a country club owner have for all that material? It certainly raises the suspicion he intended to monetize it.

 

As for Repubs who stand by trump's claims he declassified (despite the mandatory paper trail not existing), let these Repubs stand behind that belief and agree to publish every last document, so that putin, Xi, the mullahs in Iran, al Qaeda, etc., can be brought up to speed on US strengths and weaknesses, knowledge of adversairies, clandestine penetrations of adversaries by identity, etc.

 

Oh, and according to the indictment, some docs were classified "RD", which applies to nuclear secrets. Only the Dept of Energy can declassify those. A POTUS cannot.

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Have to disagree with you there (unsurprisingly). I just get a bit tired of the constant and reflexive "but Trump...." whenever another politician is mentioned or criticized even in the gentlest possible way.  You can see almost any discussion get derailed easily by falling down that particular rabbit hole. IMHO there should be a similar rule to Godwin's Law, except with respect to injecting Trump into discussions where he has no need to be. 

 

As I said, he had a good first term but after that... the wheels came off.  I can only hope that my good cousins to the south come to their collective senses and nominate two different people for their respective parties in 2024. 

Odd point to raise in a Trump related thread.

 

But we can’t agree on everything.

 

Trump’s only term was a crock.

 

 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Chomper Higgot

[Walker88]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

I'm betting I could get a few thousand empty unsealed envelopes postmarked fairly easily.

I'll take the other side of that bet.

 

Of course even if one side could do it, the other side could, too. Wash.

 

Never has a Dem been recorded saying, "If you could just find me...11,780 votes...etc."

 

trump lost. Badly. It was the worst drubbing of an incumbent R ever.

 

Time to move on.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

I'll take the other side of that bet.

 

Of course even if one side could do it, the other side could, too. Wash.

 

Never has a Dem been recorded saying, "If you could just find me...11,780 votes...etc."

 

trump lost. Badly. It was the worst drubbing of an incumbent R ever.

 

Time to move on.

You misquoted him. The senile old fool actually said "If you could just find me... ugh... 11,780 votes".

[cjinchiangrai]

3 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Not pro-Trump, but ..............

If the President of the USA can't view and share their countries secrets it just seems wrong.

Surely it's all up to him?

 

If I were president, my defense would be, "They're my secrets to do with what I will"

But he is not the president and never had permission to keep the classified documents.

[OneMoreFarang]

We all know that Trump lies all the time.

 

I am waiting for 90% of his party to finally admit that Trump is a serial liar.

In the moment most of them still pretend that Trump is a great candidate to become POTUS again.

When will they finally admit the truth? 

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Not pro-Trump, but ..............

If the President of the USA can't view and share their countries secrets it just seems wrong.

Surely it's all up to him?

 

If I were president, my defense would be, "They're my secrets to do with what I will"

Actuallyi, that's the line that Trump is pursuing. And, as even most conservative legal experts have pointed out, it's ridiculous. The documents are not his property and never were his property. Given that they are not personal in nature, they never will be his property. That's the law.

[ThailandRyan]

The wheels are coming off of the Trump bus and his planes engines are starting to wobble.

 

Lawrence: Trump incriminated himself on Fox tonight | Watch (msn.com)

[BritManToo]

40 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

I've repeated this ad nauseum, but even a competent POTUS is not fully aware of the harm revealing classified material can do. That is why there is a process to declassify. None of that "in my mind I declassified", as agency chiefs must be able to view, redact if necessary, and not sign on if they wholeheartedly disagree. trump is/was hardly competent, so he was a particular loose cannon.

I don't believe any government should keep secrets, it's not democratic.

Let every adult read everything.