Former FBI director to lead Russia inquiry

[Traveler19491]

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Only one word needed.

OBAMACARE.

Again, no facts. Your silly little drivel is meaningless without facts. You are a champion deflector with no intent to actually debate. You just want to beat your chest about how "magnificent" the orange one is and whine about the "haters"...with no facts. No, the ACA is not perfect. Everyone knew that from the beginning. But it has cut the uninsured rate in half, and I doubt that your whining would be appreciated by the many whose lives have been saved by it. The fact that you haven't the first clue about how insurance works notwithstanding, you are still obligated to provide facts to support your "arguments".

[iReason]

Republicans Watch Their Step in a Slow Retreat From Trump

 

"WASHINGTON — Republicans on Sunday inched away from President Trump amid mounting evidence that he may have sought to interfere in the federal investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election."

 

"In a sign of growing anxiety, several important Republicans expressed discomfort with Mr. Trump’s firing of the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, who had been leading the agency’s inquiry into whether Mr. Trump’s associates colluded with Russian officials."

 

"If any president tries to impede an investigation — any president, no matter who it is — by interfering with the F.B.I., yes, that would be problematic,” Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who is on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/21/us/politics/republicans-watch-their-step-in-a-slow-retreat-from-trump.html

 

Fancy that: "mounting evidence"

[thaibeachlovers]

14 hours ago, heybruce said:

And yet with all those years in which to come up with a better plan, the Republicans still have nothing.

That's because the Republicans are just as bad as the Democrats. They're politicians- what else did you expect?

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, Traveler19491 said:

Again, no facts. Your silly little drivel is meaningless without facts. You are a champion deflector with no intent to actually debate. You just want to beat your chest about how "magnificent" the orange one is and whine about the "haters"...with no facts. No, the ACA is not perfect. Everyone knew that from the beginning. But it has cut the uninsured rate in half, and I doubt that your whining would be appreciated by the many whose lives have been saved by it. The fact that you haven't the first clue about how insurance works notwithstanding, you are still obligated to provide facts to support your "arguments".

Given that the anti Trumpers haven't given a single "fact" to prove Russia colluded, that is worth  about.

When did I ever say Trump is "magnificent"? Perhaps you could provide some evidence to back your story up.

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, mogandave said:

This guy is on Trump's payroll...he will find nothing, if anything he'll end up charging Hillary.

The press has to get busy and nail this bastard...we can't look to Trump's government for help!


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

The press have zero, nothing, nada. They've been busy, but they haven't published any facts to prove collusion yet.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, Traveler19491 said:

DOW 2009 - 7649/2017 - 19855

Private sector job creation Bush - (462,000 negative)/Obama - +14,910,000

Consumer Confidence Jan, 2009 - 37.7/Oct, 2016 - 92.4

Actual jobs added in 8 years  Bush - 1.3 million/Obama - 11.3 million

Deficit as % of GDP  2009 - 9,8/2017 - 2.9

Annual Deficit  2009 - $1.4 trillion/2016 - $426 billion

 

Yeah, those last 8 years really sucked. Obama was far from being a great President, but his record eclipsed that of his predecessor. Overall his numbers were good. Additionally, he was highly respected by world leaders. The same world leaders who view Trump as little more than an incompetent, dangerous man-child. There were several reasons why so many uninformed, willfully ignorant people voted for Trump. He was hugely successful at exploiting their ignorance about the economy and the facts on domestic terrorism. He succeeded in fanning their fears about immigration and their personal biases on race, gender, homosexuality, and abortion (he was for it before he was against it). He managed to convince them that he was "successful" without providing any proof, like his taxes or a detailed financial statement (he's not, unless you consider cheating, lying, and engaging in  business practices of dubious legality to be "successful") and that he was smarter than the average politician/business person/military leader/religious expert/philosopher/scientist/healthcare worker/insurance professional/etc., etc., etc. He was able to capitalize on the hunger by the borderline illiterate for someone to tell them what to do and to curtail the freedoms exercised by thinking people that annoy/frighten the ignorant, like the 19 states that are moving to criminalize peaceful protest in blatant violation of the First Amendment. Trump fanned the flames of fear when he claimed that unemployment was closer to 42% (a flat out lie) because of the people no longer looking for jobs. He included high school students, the disabled, the retired, stay-at-home parents, and many others who would remain unemployed regardless of what the economy was like. He lied repeatedly when he assured the gullible that he would be "the greatest job creator ever". He lied when he promised to bring back coal mining jobs. He lied when he promised to "Buy American", then used Chinese steel to build his hotel in Washington while having his clothing lines and even his "Make America Great Again" hats made in sweat shops overseas. I could continue, but I'd be here all day. Trump lies when it would be easier to tell the truth.

 

You trumpanzees love to whine about how horrible it was under Obama, yet you refuse to post facts to back up your pathetic drivel. Put up or shut up.

Bush was ( IMO ) a terrible president and a scoundrel that colluded with the banks to create a housing bubble that imploded before he had left office ( bad planning there ), but Obama only had to be better than terrible. It doesn't mean he did a good job. Clinton was a better president than him because he worked with the GOP to improve the economy.

As for "world leaders" like Merkel and Tony Blair 5555555555555555. Being respected by people like them is no compliment.

 

Anyway, if Obama was so great and did such a good job, why didn't his annointed successor win? Perhaps because the voters didn't want a third term of Obama's policies.

Edited May 22, 2017 by thaibeachlovers

[Becker]

19 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Only one word needed.

OBAMACARE.

[heybruce]

27 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given that the anti Trumpers haven't given a single "fact" to prove Russia colluded, that is worth  about.

When did I ever say Trump is "magnificent"? Perhaps you could provide some evidence to back your story up.

 

23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The press have zero, nothing, nada. They've been busy, but they haven't published any facts to prove collusion yet.

Do you understand how investigations work? 

 

When police investigate a crime scene, they don't take a quick look, say "Gee, I don't see any facts clarifying this mess." and close the 'investigation'.  They follow leads.

 

That is what current investigations into Russian in interference in the election are doing, following up on suspicious meetings, analysis of spyware used on computers, looking into undeclared payments from foreign governments, etc.  I wouldn't be surprised if no hard evidence of willing collusion is found, but I also wouldn't be surprised if evidence that the Trump campaign was unwittingly used by the Russians is found.

Edited May 22, 2017 by heybruce

[mtls2005]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The press have zero, nothing, nada. They've been busy, but they haven't published any facts to prove collusion yet.

 

Yes, they have.

 

However not collusion (on the election) involving Trump himself, just several in his inner circle.

 

Was he aware of it? No, at least not until after the fact.

 

Did he direct it? Of course not, no one thinks he's that bright.

 

The cover up has involved quite a few more people, both wittingly and unwittingly.

 

It seems likely other crimes will be uncovered/revealed (conspiracy, money laundering).

 

 

Trump/Comey conversation...

 

 

 

[mtls2005]

Trump asked intelligence chiefs to push back against FBI collusion probe after Comey revealed its existence

 

 

President Trump asked two of the nation’s top intelligence officials in March to help him push back against an FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government, according to current and former officials.

 

Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.

 

Coats and Rogers refused to comply with the requests, which they both deemed to be inappropriate, according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.d51c96a4e34d

[Traveler19491]

17 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given that the anti Trumpers haven't given a single "fact" to prove Russia colluded, that is worth  about.

When did I ever say Trump is "magnificent"? Perhaps you could provide some evidence to back your story up.

Again with the deflection. You brought up the ACA. You offered a meaningless one-word assertion with nothing to back it up. I responded with facts. You refuse to address the facts, instead, mentioning Russia. Classic deflection in the absence of a firm position. You continue to deflect, thereby proving my point about you having nothing more than deflection to "back up" your arguments, then demanding that others supply you with facts for their positions. You are, without a doubt, one of the worst debaters on here, consistently refusing to support your arguments and forever insisting that others do the heavy lifting. I didn't mention Russia, but you immediately go there due to the simple fact that you got nuthin'. I would prefer to assume that you are a reasonably intelligent person, but your desultory comment about Russia along with your consistent refusal to defend your position would tend to belie that assumption. I think most of us opposed to Trump now recognize that you really have nothing to debate with (mostly because your beloved orange Whiner-in-Chief hasn't given you anything to debate with), so, rather than admit that you made a gargantuan error in judgment, you deflect, deflect, deflect. Your inability to provide anything to support your position is noted.

[Traveler19491]

17 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyway, if Obama was so great and did such a good job, why didn't his annointed successor win? Perhaps because the voters didn't want a third term of Obama's policies.

1

Deflection, again. We weren't discussing Hillary. You stated that people's lives were horrible after 8 years of Obama. I provided facts to refute that asinine claim. You refuse to rebut the facts, instead, deflecting to Hillary. I'm beginning to suspect you are a victim of severe ADHD.

 

Put up, or please do us all a mammoth favor and follow through on your heretofore whining, pathetically empty threats to leave and not comment anymore. That would so improve the quality of this and countless other threads.

[Scott]

Constantly deflecting is simply trolling and will result in warnings and suspensions.   Stay on topic, which isn't about Obama.