Decency, Trump and Obama.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-22-2017, 09:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'm not distracted a bit; I simply posted some news with a comment of It appears he may have been. 

My views on Trump commenting about being surveilled have been made known and I thought understood. I could give a damn less if he was surveilled if it were thought to be in the National Interest. Hell I hope POTUS did order the surveillance if he had reason to believe their was foul play.

You guys just get confused sometimes when folks can judge individual events on their own merits. See the reasoning I provided Dino for why I explained myself here. 

Watch your mouth.

[GMDino]

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: First off: Watch your mouth.

Do think it's pretty? " "

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Secondly: It is there for folks to listen to and read. They can decide if it was incorrect to suggest this indicates he may have been survielled. 

And yet when quotes from the article you linked and others show that he wasn't you double down.

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Finally: I have said (in this very thread I believe) that his comments about being survielled are some of the worst comments he's said since election and he should have been censured immediately.

So now you're saying you were wrong?

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I do not mention this to explain myself to you as most here already realize the purpose of your existence in this forum.

Yes, to post and comment...just like every other member. Some agree with me. Some do not. Such is life.

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I mention this in case someone is stupid enough to take what you say with any degree of validity. 

You mean like if I quote articles that show Trump was wrong/lying and you keep insisting "he maybe" was right?

Got it.

You're funny.

[*bfine32*]

(03-22-2017, 08:30 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: You sure are distracted.

(03-22-2017, 09:17 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Watch your mouth.

Indeed

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: First off: Watch your mouth.

Indeed.

[GMDino]

http://crooksandliars.com/2017/03/fox-news-john-roberts-rep-nunes-put-dog

Quote:Fox News White House correspondent John Roberts characterized Rep. Nunes' impromptu and unprecedented press conference as a "dog and pony show."



Roberts joined Fox News' Shepard Smith to discuss Rep. Nunes political stunt and they played a very brief response by Trump, when he was asked if he felt vindicated by what Nunes had briefed him on.


Trump said, “I somewhat do. I must tell you I somewhat do. I very much appreciated the fact that they found what they found, I somewhat do.”


That was nicely coordinated.


Roberts has been anything but a right wing safety valve for the Trump administration and rightly called out Rep. Nunes for throwing Trump a life jacket over his crazy allegations that Obama wiretapped him at Trump Tower.


If you missed the story, read: "Nunes Grandstands For Trump, Says Transition Team Communications Collected"


After Shepard played the clip of Trump, John Roberts shared what many in the media felt after Nunes ran around like a chicken without its head to tell the president what he had found.


Roberts said, "[Nunes] was asked this question. Was it appropriate for the chairman of the Republican Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee to immediately after he found about this, come running over to brief the president on it."


"There is a certain and I'm probably going to get in a little bit of trouble from Trump supporters on this, a certain sense of dog and pony show about this whole thing,' he said.


Roberts continued, "He didn't just call down to the White House, that he made a show of coming down here to the WH, almost on an emergency basis and briefing the president about all of this so that the president had that information in hand when he would next have the entire White House pool in there and could talk about it."


That's exactly what happened. Rep. Nunes leaked to the White House exactly what the White House hammered James Comey about on Monday.


This proves once and for all that Rep. Nunes is not acting like the ranking member of the House Intelligence committee, but as a partisan hack who worked on 
Trump's transition team and is looking to cover up for Trump's many lies about President Obama illegally wiretapping him and to supply Sean Hannity's next three hours of programming.

Digby writes:

Quote:Unfortunately for him, Nunes is a moron and has opened a Pandora's Box by saying that the intercepts had nothing to do with Russia and implying that there are other FISA warrants out there that picked up conversations with Trump officials. If he hadn't said that one might have assumed that these were the kind of incidental routine intercepts of conversations with foreigners that don't require a FISA warrant. He seems confused.

One thing is now crystal clear. Nunes cannot run the House intelligence committee investigation. As a member of Trump's transition team he should have recused himself from the beginning. Now he's so obviously tainted that he made the best cast yet for an Independent commission and/or a special prosecutor. He should not be given any more access to intelligence reports. After spending the whole day on Monday ragging on leaks to James Comey he just went out and held a press conference hurling charges based upon a ... leak.

[hollodero]

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Secondly: It is there for folks to listen to and read. They can decide if it was incorrect to suggest this indicates he may have been survielled. 

May have been. This whole show that republican gave, I happened to see it live out of London interest, was strange, strange, strange. FISA warrants involved, all completely legal, nothing to do with Russia, allegedly unmasked identities that in fact obviously weren't unmasked (that Nunes guy just stated he could conclude who the masked persons were, hence unmasking them himself), it made all zero sense to me.

About the surveillance and "somewhat vindicating" Trump's claims, I stand by by initial statement.

(03-05-2017, 06:01 PM)hollodero Wrote: First, even if Trump was surveilled, that doesn't mean in any way that his claims were right, or correct, or however this is turned. He blamed Obama directly. If Obama wasn't directly involved, Trump lied. No nuance to defend his tweets there. Either Obama illegally ordered a wire tap, or Trump is an arsonist that has no intention of uniting the country.

The possible incidental surveillance of possibly Trump (both not clear) in Trump Tower (seems unlikely) happened after the election (not before) and had nothing to do with Obama ordering it. Trump's blatant lie has not turned into anyting less blatant.

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Finally: I have said (in this very thread I believe) that his comments about being survielled are some of the worst comments he's said since election and he should have been censured immediately. I do not mention this to explain myself to you as most here already realize the purpose of your existence in this forum. I mention this in case someone is stupid enough to take what you say with any degree of validity. 

I have no idea why they are after you on this one.

[Dill]

(03-23-2017, 05:55 AM)hollodero Wrote: May have been. This whole show that republican gave, I happened to see it live out of London interest, was strange, strange, strange. FISA warrants involved, all completely legal, nothing to do with Russia, allegedly unmasked identities that in fact obviously weren't unmasked (that Nunes guy just stated he could conclude who the masked persons were, hence unmasking them himself), it made all zero sense to me.

About the surveillance and "somewhat vindicating" Trump's claims, I stand by by initial statement.


The possible incidental surveillance of possibly Trump (both not clear) in Trump Tower (seems unlikely) happened after the election (not before) and had nothing to do with Obama ordering it. Trump's blatant lie has not turned into anyting less blatant.


I have no idea why they are after you on this one.

You may miss the best part of this, unless you can get US talk radio.  As I was driving home yesterday, two different people called into the Tom Sullivan show to insist that Trump was now vindicated by Nunes, even if there was no direct mention of
Obama.

One caller said that Obama was capable of "anything" and had proved that repeatedly during his presidency.  He "knows" that Obama did order a wiretap, whatever the left media wants us to believe.

Another caller said that the entire government now, including the FBI, was "far left" Obama deep state.  They are now doing everything they can to block Trump. 

There may be millions of people thinking like this. And the talk show host could cap some of this if he'd only ask "Why would Comey torpedo Hillary's candidacy if the FBI are in on it?" Or "Does evidence matter any more; can we just 'know' without it?" But of course he won't do that and lose his audience. Instead he thanks them for calling in and giving people more possibilities to consider.

[GMDino]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/23/fact-check-still-no-evidence-mr-president/99549694/

Quote:There is still no evidence to support President Trump’s tweets accusing President Obama of illegally “tapping my phones in October” during the “very sacred election process.”


In a March 22 interview with Time magazine’s Michael Scherer, Trump said “new information” from the House intelligence committee chairman proved his tweets about a “Watergate/Nixon”-style scandal were “right.” That’s wrong.


Trump is referring to a press conference Rep. Devin Nunes held shortly before Trump spoke with Scherer. At his news conference, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee said he reviewed “intelligence reports” that show “incidental collection” on some unnamed Trump transition team members in November, December and January. Nunes, a Trump transition team member himself, said he believed the incidental collection of information was legally obtained.

As of this writing, Trump’s tweets — in which he described Obama as a “bad (or sick) guy!” — are still unsupported on multiple levels, based on Nunes’ account of the intelligence reports he read:

• Obama did not order wiretapping or any kind of surveillance of Trump. Nunes later that day said, on CNN’s The Lead, that his new information “doesn’t mean that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.”
• The “incidental collection” of information, as it was termed by Nunes, means others were the surveillance targets — not Trump or Trump transition members. (More on that later.)
• The information obtained during surveillance occurred after the campaign, as Nunes explained, not in October during the campaign. Nunes said he also did not know if any of Trump’s conversations were picked up during surveillance.
• The incidental collection of information was apparently legally obtained, contrary to Trump’s claim of illegal Watergate-style wiretapping.
  

In his Time magazine interview, Trump said that things he says or tweets frequently “turn out to be right,” citing the wiretapping tweets as an example.

Quote:Trump, March 22: "This is a Politico story. 'Members of the Donald Trump Transition team possibly including Trump himself were under [inadvertent] surveillance during the Obama administration following November’s election.' House intelligence chairman Devin Nunes told reporters, wow. Nunes said, so that means I’m right, Nunes said the surveillance appears to have been … incidental collection, that does not appear to have been related to concerns over Russia."

Scherer: "But so incidental collection would not be wiretapping of you, it would be wiretapping of …"

Trump: "Who know what it is? You know, why, because somebody says incidental. Nunes is going to the White House."

Scherer: "Nunes has also said that he has no evidence that your tweet was right, previously."

Trump: "Well, he just got this information. This was new information. That was just got. Members, of, let’s see, were under surveillance during the Obama Administration following November’s election. Wow. This just came out. So, ah, just came out."

When he read part of the Politico story, Trump left out the word “inadvertent” — which we inserted above. Trump also downplayed the article’s use of Nunes’ term “incidental collection,” suggesting that it is labeled as such because “somebody says incidental.” But this inadvertent collection of intercepted communications is important context when assessing Trump’s wiretapping claim.

Incidental collection occurs when a targeted foreign person happens to communicate with an American or an American is mentioned in intercepted communications.

“We may incidentally acquire the communications of Americans even though we are not targeting them, for example if they talk to non-U.S. persons outside of the United States who are properly targeted for foreign intelligence collection,” Robert S. Litt, then-general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, said in a 2013 speech. “Some of these communications may be pertinent; some may not be.”

Nunes raises an important issue about how the intelligence community protects the identities of Americans who are inadvertently picked up during the legal surveillance of non-U.S. persons.

During the March 20 House intelligence committee hearing, FBI Director James Comey stressed the importance of protecting the identity and privacy of “U.S. persons” caught up in surveillance operations. He said the intelligence agency conducting the surveillance refers to them in its reports as “U.S. person number one” or “U.S. person number two,” and they are only “unmasked,” or identified, if other intelligence agencies believe the name may be relevant to their investigation. It is also possible that the identity of a person may be known to some from the context of the intercepted communication, even if the name remains undisclosed.

Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, is an example of a Trump transition team member caught up in the surveillance of a foreign agent. Flynn was overheard in late December, before Trump took office, discussing U.S. sanctions against Russia in phone calls with that country’s ambassador to the United States. That information was leaked to the media in February, and Flynn was forced to resign because until then he had publicly insisted he did not discuss the sanctions with Russia.

The Trump administration has long complained about leaks to the media, and, more recently, it has taken issue with the “unmasking” of U.S. persons caught up in the surveillance of foreign targets. It may have a point about those things. But that does not mean the president’s tweets about Obama are at all accurate. There is no proof of that.

Trump’s Also Still Wrong About ….

The illegal wiretapping claim wasn’t all that Trump got wrong in the Time interview.

Trump doubled down on his unfounded accusation that Rafael Cruz, the father of Sen. Ted Cruz, was with Lee Harvey Oswald just prior to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Trump told Time that his baseless claim about Cruz was something he read “in the newspaper.” The newspaper in question is the tabloid National Enquirer. And while Trump told Time the paper “had a picture of Ted Cruz, his father, and Lee Harvey Oswald, having breakfast,” it did not. For more info on this absurd claim, see our story, “Trump’s Tall Tabloid Tale,” and “Trump Defends Oswald Claim.”

Asked about his unsubstantiated claim that “thousands and thousands” of people in New Jersey celebrated on Sept. 11, 2001, when the World Trade Center was attacked, Trump falsely said, “Well if you look at the reporter, he wrote the story in The Washington Post.” That is not what the reporters wrote.
And the reporters never backtracked on that, despite Trump’s many claims to the contrary.

Trump also stuck to his baseless claim that millions of people voted illegally for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. “Well I think I will be proved right about that, too,” Trump told Time.

“Well now if you take a look at the votes, when I say that, I mean mostly they register wrong, in other words, for the votes, they register incorrectly, and/or illegally. And they then vote. You have tremendous numbers of people. In fact I’m forming a committee on it,” the president said.

As we have reported, repeatedly, a 2012 study by the Pew Charitable Trusts found that “more than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters” and that “approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.” But there is no evidence that millions voted illegally, as Trump claims.

The president describes himself in the Time interview as a soothsayer. He may believe he has an uncanny ability to predict the future, but we have seen no evidence to support his unsubstantiated claims about alleged past events that involve illegal campaign wiretapping, Cruz’s connection to JFK’s assassination, massive 9/11 celebrations and widespread voter fraud.

[hollodero]

(03-23-2017, 05:51 PM)Dill Wrote: You may miss the best part of this, unless you can get US talk radio.  As I was driving home yesterday, two different people called into the Tom Sullivan show to insist that Trump was now vindicated by Nunes, even if there was no direct mention of
Obama.

One caller said that Obama was capable of "anything" and had proved that repeatedly during his presidency.  He "knows" that Obama did order a wiretap, whatever the left media wants us to believe.

Another caller said that the entire government now, including the FBI, was "far left" Obama deep state.  They are now doing everything they can to block Trump. 

There may be millions of people thinking like this. And the talk show host could cap some of this if he'd only ask "Why would Comey torpedo Hillary's candidacy if the FBI are in on it?" Or "Does evidence matter any more; can we just 'know' without it?" But of course he won't do that and lose his audience. Instead he thanks them for calling in and giving people more possibilities to consider.

Internet gets you anything. But there are certain limits... I read some comments on FOX and Breitbart, and that's all there is to observe. No matter how irrefutably logical a point is, as long as it's not pro Trump the reactions are solely "take your meds, you clearly lost it, Trump makes libtards look stupid every day" and there's that.

Must be the result of decade-long brainwashing, and talk radio plays a part in that from what I understand. I read about Republicans recognizing that they lost all flexibility in their talking points because the indoctrination was overdone. Guess it was necessary, the republican party is a strange alliance between extremely economic liberal corporate America, the true conservative "intellectuals" (the quotation marks are not meant to diminish their intellect) and the poorer, less educated country folk - who have to vote against their economic interest every election. The way to do that is to call the GOP the more patriotic, Christ-loving gun-freedom rural party, so somehow the Founding Fathers would be the one being against corporate taxes and climate change measurements make little Jesus cry. It was one of the more puzzling and fascinating things to see, long before Trump. How many Americans vote against their own basic interests and why.

That the latter group will go alt-right doesn't come as a surprise, in that light. I lost my point, just, I guess I can imagine how your talk radio works without listening to it.

[GMDino]

(03-22-2017, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: First off: Watch your mouth.

Secondly: It is there for folks to listen to and read. They can decide if it was incorrect to suggest this indicates he may have been survielled. 

Finally: I have said (in this very thread I believe) that his comments about being survielled are some of the worst comments he's said since election and he should have been censured immediately. I do not mention this to explain myself to you as most here already realize the purpose of your existence in this forum. I mention this in case someone is stupid enough to take what you say with any degree of validity. 

“There was no wiretapping of Trump Tower. That didn’t happen,” House Intel Chair Devin Nunes just reiterated after new revelations this week pic.twitter.com/OzDjG914iV

— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) March 24, 2017

Still watching....

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-24-2017, 11:52 AM)GMDino Wrote:

“There was no wiretapping of Trump Tower. That didn’t happen,” House Intel Chair Devin Nunes just reiterated after new revelations this week pic.twitter.com/OzDjG914iV

— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) March 24, 2017

Still watching....

Bfine sure does report. You decide.

[*bfine32*]

(03-24-2017, 11:52 AM)GMDino Wrote: Still watching....

Dang it. I should have say "may be". You got me again. Foiled again by you and your little dog.

oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:We got him

[GMDino]

(03-24-2017, 12:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Dang it. I should have say "may be". You got me again. Foiled again by you and your little dog.

You misunderstood.

Still watching my mouth....



Although I do find it cute you think that because two people disagree with you one of them is just lapping the other.

[*bfine32*]

(03-24-2017, 12:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: You misunderstood.

Still watching my mouth....



Although I do find it cute you think that because two people disagree with you one of them is just lapping the other.

What do you disagree with on this matter or is it just a general disagreement?

As to watching your mouth. Some folks don't like being called a liar; especially when they come from a culture where honesty can be a matter of great importance and not just a inspirational poster on a wall. I assumed the "other person"  that disagrees was aware of this concept; however, perhaps not.

[GMDino]

Actual email sent out by Trump Headquarters pic.twitter.com/8c3qwbNoUb

— Molly Crabapple (@mollycrabapple) March 23, 2017

If you click on "I believe the democrats and fake news," you get this page pic.twitter.com/EuSxjy3dDb

— Molly Crabapple (@mollycrabapple) March 23, 2017

Trump ends the "poll" by begging for money (which you should give him to spite the lyin' media) pic.twitter.com/XN02PBecQX

— Molly Crabapple (@mollycrabapple) March 23, 2017

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-24-2017, 12:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What do you disagree with on this matter or is it just a general disagreement?

As to watching your mouth. Some folks don't like being called a liar; especially when they come from a culture where honesty can be a matter of great importance and not just a inspirational poster on a wall. I assumed the "other person"  that disagrees was aware of this concept; however, perhaps not.

The comment is there for people to read. They can decide for themselves. Right?

The Nunes' press conference is just a thinly veiled defense of Trump's wire tapping claim. Your post is a thinly veiled defense of Nunes' thinly veiled defense of Trump. It's like the Pythagorean Theorum of Political Bullshit. This isn't even a story without Trump's unsubstantiated claims which started this mess.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-22-2017, 06:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Looks like Trump may have been under surveillance. It just wasn't "on purpose"

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-devin-nunes-wiretapping-fbi-intelligence-committee-572423?rx=us

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/521358/

It is being reported the info Nunes made a show of giving to the White House . . . came from the White House . . . so Nunes could make a show of giving it to the White House.

We need to #stoptheleaks.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-03-2017, 05:52 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/521358/

It is being reported the info Nunes made a show of giving to the White House . . . came from the White House . . . so Nunes could make a show of giving it to the White House.

We need to #stoptheleaks.

Sort of.  He needed access to their NSC computers.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(04-04-2017, 09:55 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Sort of.  He needed access to their NSC computers.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel

Who is claiming he needed access to NCS computers? Nunes? Nunes lied to the author of that article last week as to the source if his information. Nunes' integrity is completely compromised on this issue. Additionally, last week Adam Schiff reported he viewed the same documents Nunes did. Documents, not computers.

[GMDino]

More Trump "Decency".

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/327410-trump-to-cnn-boss-i-always-find-a-way-to-get-even

Quote:President Trump reportedly threatened CNN's president last year in an email, with Trump warning "I always find a way to get even."



Trump's email to CNN president Jeff Zucker, reported by the New York Times Wednesday, came after CNN panelists pressed 
Trump during a presidential debate about the "Access Hollywood" tape that showed him boasting about sexually assaulting women.


In the full email, reportedly delivered by Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks, Trump accused Zucker of disloyalty and alluded to further retribution: 

Quote:“Jeff — Too bad you (CNN) couldn’t be honest with how well I did in the debate. The dumbest thing I ever did was get you the job at CNN — you are the most disloyal person. Just remember, I always seem to find a way to get even. Best wishes, Donald J. Trump.”

Trump lobbied for Zucker to get CNN's top job in 2012, according to the Times report, although CNN sources disputed that Trump's influence played any role in Zucker's hire.

He's a five year old.  It's embarrassing.