Re-election

[Ponca Dan]

Don't feel the need to convince you, and message board postings aren't the same thing as a lawyer making a case....not even close. You can start with two very simple facts though....

1. The 1st President since WWII to refuse to release his tax returns hasn't brought any transparency at all.
2. A President that gives three different reasons for firing the FBI hasn't brought any transparency at all.
3. A President that tweets contradictory tweets and demonstrably inaccurate and misleading tweets isn't bring transparency.

A question though...why didn't you call him out to make his argument that his original proposition is true. You supposed for him? Any particular reason?

I was in no way attempting to provoke an argument with you. I've pretty much given up on that proposition. Someone the other day said you and I are like oil and water, and he's right. It does no one any good for the two of us to behave like ill mannered teenagers.

You are a lawyer. You intimated you could easily make the case against his statement that Trump is transparent. I was curious how you as a lawyer would make that case. Nothing beyond that curiosity.

I am curious by nature. I confess you intrigue me. I wonder what kind of law you practice. Trial law, do you argue in court before a jury? Business law, an accountant of sorts? From some of your previous comments I sometimes think you may be a lawyer in some government agency. Of course it's none of my business. Just curious.

 

[CowboyJD]

I was in no way attempting to provoke an argument with you. I've pretty much given up on that proposition. Someone the other day said you and I are like oil and water, and he's right. It does no one any good for the two of us to behave like ill mannered teenagers.

You are a lawyer. You intimated you could easily make the case against his statement that Trump is transparent. I was curious how you as a lawyer would make that case. Nothing beyond that curiosity.

I am curious by nature. I confess you intrigue me. I wonder what kind of law you practice. Trial law, do you argue in court before a jury? Business law, an accountant of sorts? From some of your previous comments I sometimes think you may be a lawyer in some government agency. Of course it's none of my business. Just curious.

I am work in a state law enforcement agency. 18 years there. Many different areas of law there. Prior to that 10 years in criminal defense. Yes, I argue in court both before judges alone and at times in front of a jury. Have for going on 28 years.

 

[wyomingosualum]

Look at the fox news screenshot in my post.

Pretty sure that's a photoshop, man.

 

[wyomingosualum]

Please. Did you ever watch Fox news from '08 - '16?

Obama took office with McConnell publicly stating that defeating him was the GOP's primary goal. They obstructed and right wing media spun and exaggerated and hassled him from day one. Right down to speculating whether a meteor was an Obama plot. He was a muslim, an atheist, a marxist, an anti-christ... they even criticized him for his what his preacher said. Find that birth certificate yet? Biff was leading the charge on that one and promised he had a bombshell to drop and never did. And now Biff is treated unfairly. Riiiiiiiiiiight.

It also helps if Trump didn't lie so casually and consistently that no reputable press member would ever give him the benefit of the doubt. I hope that the right wing enjoys laying in the bed they made.

Don't feel too badly about this. Van Jones fell for it, too:

 

[squeak]

I was in no way attempting to provoke an argument with you. I've pretty much given up on that proposition. Someone the other day said you and I are like oil and water, and he's right. It does no one any good for the two of us to behave like ill mannered teenagers.

You are a lawyer. You intimated you could easily make the case against his statement that Trump is transparent. I was curious how you as a lawyer would make that case. Nothing beyond that curiosity.

I am curious by nature. I confess you intrigue me. I wonder what kind of law you practice. Trial law, do you argue in court before a jury? Business law, an accountant of sorts? From some of your previous comments I sometimes think you may be a lawyer in some government agency. Of course it's none of my business. Just curious.

He's just a dick sometimes.

 

[CowboyJD]

He's just a dick sometimes.

Don't start none, won't be none. I give back exactly what I get.

 

[aix_xpert]

Sorry, I was worried my word "transparancy" would be misconstrued. My meaning was in regards to the number of eyeballs watching everything thing he does and not that he is necessarily more open in his operations. If we (society and the media) watched all of our past politicians with the same eye and skepticism that we watch Trump with, there would be no Clinton Foundation, "paid" political speeches, and I suspect that a LARGE number of our national politicians (on both sides of the aisle) would have been run out of D.C. on a rail years ago.

 

[CowboyJD]

Sorry, I was worried my word "transparancy" would be misconstrued. My meaning was in regards to the number of eyeballs watching everything thing he does and not that he is necessarily more open in his operations. If we (society and the media) watched all of our past politicians with the same eye and skepticism that we watch Trump with, there would be no Clinton Foundation, "paid" political speeches, and I suspect that a LARGE number of our national politicians (on both sides of the aisle) would have been run out of D.C. on a rail years ago.

Fair enough. I agree he has been submitted to thorough scrutiny. I'm not sure how much transparency has been brought from that scrutiny though. His normal go to mode is to be as opaque as possible though, IMO. Any "transparency" with regards to his administration has been mostly forced on him pretty much against his will rather than brought by him.

 

[aix_xpert]

Fair enough. I agree he has been submitted to thorough scrutiny. I'm not sure how much transparency has been brought from that scrutiny though. His normal go to mode is to be as opaque as possible though, IMO. Any "transparency" with regards to his administration has been mostly forced on him pretty much against his will rather than brought by him.

Agreed. Probably should have used scrutiny instead of transparency in my original post as it more adequately describes his environment vs. what I've seen under any other president in my lifetime. And I agree that Trump has not been transparent in his own operations.

 

[imprimis]

Fair enough. I agree he has been submitted to thorough scrutiny. I'm not sure how much transparency has been brought from that scrutiny though. His normal go to mode is to be as opaque as possible though, IMO. Any "transparency" with regards to his administration has been mostly forced on him pretty much against his will rather than brought by him.

When was the last time another president had his phone conversations with other country's leaders leaked verbatim to the media? I'd call that "transparent" albeit very damaging.

 

[Been Jammin]

When was the last time another president had his phone conversations with other country's leaders leaked verbatim to the media? I'd call that "transparent" albeit very damaging.

That is not being transparent. Being transparent would be if Trump was the one releasing transcriptions/recordings of those conversations.

 

[squeak]

Don't start none, won't be none. I give back exactly what I get.

I will point it out next time.

 

[NZ Poke]

That is not being transparent. Being transparent would be if Trump was the one releasing transcriptions/recordings of those conversations.

True -- would love to know what was being discussed here too. (Especially considering that Spying Susan Rice was there -- look at Obama's body language here, and in the video below)

Recall: Obama told Medvedev he would have more 'flexibility' after reelection. (Imagine if Trump had been recorded saying that. lol)

 

[CowboyJD]

When was the last time another president had his phone conversations with other country's leaders leaked verbatim to the media? I'd call that "transparent" albeit very damaging.

Obama had face-to-face conversations with other country's leaders leaked.

Transparent is when you disclose information yourself....not when people discover things you'd rather keep secret.

 

[CowboyJD]

I will point it out next time.

You are very thin skinned. I'd suggest you toughen up a bit. Do what you want though. Makes no difference to me.

 

[CowboyJD]

Agreed. Probably should have used scrutiny instead of transparency in my original post as it more adequately describes his environment vs. what I've seen under any other president in my lifetime. And I agree that Trump has not been transparent in his own operations.

It's good that you agree.

I hear I'm just a dick sometimes so you probably shouldn't make it a regular thing.

 

[NZ Poke]

Transparent is when you disclose information yourself....not when people discover things you'd rather keep secret.

With this in mind, what word would you use to describe CNN here?

 

[CowboyJD]

With this in mind, what word would you use to describe CNN here?

View embedded media

Have you EVER...in your entire board lifetime....seen me defend or speak favorably of CNN?

 

[squeak]

You are very thin skinned. I'd suggest you toughen up a bit. Do what you want though. Makes no difference to me.

Lol...ok dad.

 

[CowboyJD]

Lol...ok dad.

Sure thing, Sparky.

It's lunchtime, I'm bored.

Come at me bro....metaphorically speaking of course.

 

[NZ Poke]

Have you EVER...in your entire board lifetime....seen me defend or speak favorably of CNN?

Nope, but that's not what or why I asked.


I'm genuinely interested in what word you would use to describe CNN there. (From your *legal* analytical perspective)

 

[squeak]

Sure thing, Sparky.

I think I touched a nerve.

 

[CowboyJD]

I think I touched a nerve.

Nah.

You did selectively misquote a post though.

 

[CowboyJD]

Nope, but that's not what or why I asked.


I'm genuinely interested in what word you would use to describe CNN there. (From your *legal* analytical perspective)

Certainly not transparent.

Keep trying to pivot and derail the thread though.

 

[aix_xpert]

It's good that you agree.

I hear I'm just a dick sometimes so you probably shouldn't make it a regular thing.

I can't speak for others but I've never had an issue with you JD. We don't agree on all things politically, but I have no issue having discussions of differing opinions on varying topics.

 

[CowboyJD]

I can't speak for others but I've never had an issue with you JD. We don't agree on all things politically, but I have no issue having discussions of differing opinions on varying topics.

The funny thing about this whole squeak thing is I, myself, have said I was just being a dick at various times. I make no secret that I post here to amuse myself and that's the only reason.

At the same time, just about everyone here has said or done something just to be a dick....including squeak.

I found the random shot at me from him....dickish....and at the same time, pretty funny. He's still holding a grudge for something on a message board. Not sure what.

It's all good. Really

 

[squeak]

The funny thing about this whole squeak thing is I, myself, have said I was just being a dick at various times. I make no secret that I post here to amuse myself and that's the only reason.

At the same time, just about everyone here has said or done something just to be a dick....including squeak.

I found the random shot at me from him....dickish....and at the same time, pretty funny. He's still holding a grudge for something on a message board. Not sure what.

It's all good. Really

No grudge. I'm a dick more often than not. I agree, I was also being a dick when I posted that.

I like you on this board (especially since you don't give a **** if I like you or not). I just thought in this instance you were a dick. I was telling this poster basically not to take it personally. I can think of one other time when you were a dick, but there must be other times as you've admitted.

Anyway, you're exactly right, it's all good.

 

[JimmyBob]

I know you two are getting close:

 

[CowboyJD]

No grudge. I'm a dick more often than not. I agree, I was also being a dick when I posted that.

I like you on this board (especially since you don't give a **** if I like you or not). I just thought in this instance you were a dick. I was telling this poster basically not to take it personally. I can think of one other time when you were a dick, but there must be other times as you've admitted.

Anyway, you're exactly right, it's all good.

We can agree to disagree on this particular instance.