Trump/Comey

[aix_xpert]

You think the NYT reporter was trying to influence an ongoing FBI investigation?

Not at all what I said. But I expect investigations to be performed confidentially, and that the head's of our government (particularly those involved in such media-driven investigations) are not having private meetings with reporters. Yet, here is a story where the reporter is directly given information regarding an ongoing investigation as part of a dinner conversation. As I said elsewhere, if I did any such thing, I'd be fired so fast my head would spin, yet here its so commonplace and casual, that the NYT writer had no concern or compunction in writing a full article describing topics and statements made by the sitting FBI director. It also shows why leaks are so prevalent. These types of meetings have been going between the agency and FBI for years. You think this writer just starting having dinner with Comey. You think Comey is the only FBIer that's having dinner with NYT (or HuffPo, or CNN, etc) writers?

 

[07pilt]

Hannity is a hack. Can't remember the last time I watched his show.

Just so we are clear - I'm not claiming that Podesta murdered Seth Rich (not saying he didn't), but this isn't the first time this story became interesting.

The confirmation bias one needs to completely disregard the Seth Rich story at this point is kind of a microcosm of what is wrong with tribalism in politics.

 

[MegaPoke]

Did you get into Dong's box of zingers?

 

[07pilt]

Did you get into Dong's box of zingers?

I dismissed them because they were from Hostess, which I consider to be a hack snackfoods company.

 

[GL97]

You think this writer just starting having dinner with Comey. You think Comey is the only FBIer that's having dinner with NYT (or HuffPo, or CNN, etc) writers?

Nope. But I am sure there are FBIers having dinner with Fox News, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Time writers as well.

And to me, that makes the actions of Trump and his administration even more foolish. Everybody talks in D.C. at some level. That is why a President has to be smart in what he says and does, both publicly and privately.

 

[Been Jammin]

Not at all what I said. But I expect investigations to be performed confidentially, and that the head's of our government (particularly those involved in such media-driven investigations) are not having private meetings with reporters. Yet, here is a story where the reporter is directly given information regarding an ongoing investigation as part of a dinner conversation. As I said elsewhere, if I did any such thing, I'd be fired so fast my head would spin, yet here its so commonplace and casual, that the NYT writer had no concern or compunction in writing a full article describing topics and statements made by the sitting FBI director. It also shows why leaks are so prevalent. These types of meetings have been going between the agency and FBI for years. You think this writer just starting having dinner with Comey. You think Comey is the only FBIer that's having dinner with NYT (or HuffPo, or CNN, etc) writers?

To be fair, from what I am seeing, Comey wasn't sharing information about the investigation with the author. He was discussing issues with his relationship with POTUS and how POTUS was treating him while the investigation was ongoing. I do agree with the overall theme of your post though.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

It is funny how those on the right are now complaining about "leaks" and "questionable reporting" when they had no problem embracing "leaks" and "questionable reporting" as it related to the Clintons and Obama.

Leaks are good when they help one's political purposes or align with one's political beliefs. They are bad when they don't.

It's funny how those that were crying foul over the right dreaming up stories about Obama are now dreaming up stories about Trump. Please you are no more intellectualy honest than those you are trying to chastise here. It cuts both ways on that statement.

 

[GL97]

It's funny how those that were crying foul over the right dreaming up stories about Obama are now dreaming up stories about Trump. Please you are no more intellectualy honest than those you are trying to chastise here. It cuts both ways on that statement.

I don't think (nor did I ever think) the Clinton email controversy was a dreamed up story. Clinton made a serious mistake there. I also don't think this controversy involving Trump is dreamed up either.

Are there dreamed up stories? Sure. But this Russia stuff (and Trump's response to the investigation) isn't one of them. And anyone who is intellectually honest should be able to admit that. Unfortunately, many on the right can't just like many on the left couldn't do so with the Clinton email controversy.

 

[wino]

So.... CNN, NYT and "Mr. Bauman, a communications professional who often represents Democratic causes" have collectively debunked this 10 month mystery in a matter of hours? Fascinating.

Whelp, if you can't trust sources like that not to cover up a murder conspiracy that IF true, would burn the DNC to the ground, who can you trust?

I was not saying the ENTIRE case was debunked in a matter of hours. There's still an unsolved murder, for one thing.

I was saying that the particular story angle that was politicized and run with on Monday was debunked/recanted/refuted.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/h...th-rich-the-slain-dnc-staffer/article/2623263

And if we're painting with partisan brushes...

The services of the private investigator who spoke to press was offered to the Rich family and paid for by a third party, and contractually was barred from speaking to press or anyone outside of law enforcement or the family unless explicitly authorized by the family.

The "third party" mentioned in the statement is financial adviser and Fox News contributor Ed Butowsky, Bauman told NBC News Tuesday.

Since the Examiner/Adams are far from left wing mouthpieces, can they have the last word?

To sum things up: The supposed bombshell reports this week are trash.

They have done nothing to answer some of the conspiracies surrounding Rich's unsolved murder. They have, however, done a great job of infuriating the victim's still-grieving family.

Great work all around, fellas.

My opinion: solve the murder, investigate every lead, but don't be so quick to rush to judgement until there's something there. And for the victim's sake, don't make it a political football.

 

[wino]

So.... CNN, NYT and "Mr. Bauman, a communications professional who often represents Democratic causes" have collectively debunked this 10 month mystery in a matter of hours? Fascinating.

Whelp, if you can't trust sources like that not to cover up a murder conspiracy that IF true, would burn the DNC to the ground, who can you trust?

It appears that the selection of which "if true" suppositions one dives headfirst into is tribal as well.

Look, see how easy it is:

"If you can't trust Donald Trump not to cover up an espionage conspiracy that IF true, would burn the RNC to the ground, who can you trust?"

What I just typed was every bit as presumptuous as your statement. Both are tribal accusations that being with the biased assumption of guilt before facts. I don't believe in the sincerity of what I typed, for that very reason. Do you believe in the sincerity of your statement?

 

[GL97]

I know what it's really about without reading it.

Kinda like you just knew Trump appointed Mueller to be the special counsel?

 

[HighStickHarry]

Kinda like you just knew Trump appointed Mueller to be the special counsel?

Trump is a little less predictable than a linked been jammin article.

 

[GL97]

Trump is a little less predictable than a linked been jammin article.

Yeah, but who appoints a special counsel isn't.

 

[MegaPoke]

It appears that the selection of which "if true" suppositions one dives headfirst into is tribal as well.

Look, see how easy it is:

"If you can't trust Donald Trump not to cover up an espionage conspiracy that IF true, would burn the RNC to the ground, who can you trust?"

What I just typed was every bit as presumptuous as your statement. Both are tribal accusations that being with the biased assumption of guilt before facts. I don't believe in the sincerity of what I typed, for that very reason. Do you believe in the sincerity of your statement?

Whataboutism.

 

[CowboyJD]

Oh, right. The CNN guy.

Look man, I'm not married to this story but the lack of intellectual curiosity about it - depending on your tribe is stunning.

As is the lack of intellectual curiosity or "no evidence, no evidence, no evidence" chants to anything Russia related depending upon your tribe.

 

[MegaPoke]

As is the lack of intellectual curiosity or "no evidence, no evidence, no evidence" chants to anything Russia related depending upon your tribe.

Been Jammin likes this.

 

[wino]

Oh, right. The CNN guy.
Look man, I'm not married to this story but the lack of intellectual curiosity about it - depending on your tribe is stunning.

As is the lack of intellectual curiosity or "no evidence, no evidence, no evidence" chants to anything Russia related depending upon your tribe.

I would like to call this "preemptive whataboutism".

Tactically, it's brilliant, as the initial statement holds up by itself, but any logical challenge to the authors sincerity is dismissed because "whataboutism"

 

[MegaPoke]

I would like to call this "preemptive whataboutism".

Tactically, it's brilliant, as the initial statement holds up by itself, but any logical challenge to the authors sincerity is dismissed because "whataboutism"

It's OK. Brilliant is strong.

 

[wino]

It's OK. Brilliant is strong.

Game respect game.

 

[PDT816]

Seriously?

Yes seriously.

Comey has been beating the "independence from politics" drum since day one at the FBI. Unfortunately, he injects himself into the political arena every chance he gets. He's a freaking addict to the attention he gets from an information vacuum.

The guy is practically masturbating under the table at hearings trying to decide what he's willing to divulge and what he elects to hold back. It's gross. No one wins with a FBI that thinks it's above oversight; be it the president, congress, etc.

 

[GL97]

Comey has been beating the "independence from politics" drum since day one at the FBI.

As he should.

Unfortunately, he injects himself into the political arena every chance he gets.

No, politicians injected him and his decisions into the political arena when they didn't like his decisions.

 

[Medic007]

No, politicians injected him and his decisions into the political arena when they didn't like his decisions.

Yes, that must be it.

 

[davidallen]

Nope. But I am sure there are FBIers having dinner with Fox News, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Time writers as well.

And to me, that makes the actions of Trump and his administration even more foolish. Everybody talks in D.C. at some level. That is why a President has to be smart in what he says and does, both publicly and privately.

There is a thread to pull here... do you think Trump really understood the job? Did he think he could work without support from the larger corpus of the federal government? Did his supporters believe that he could do whatever he wanted regardless of legal and organizational limitations?

My take is he dramatically misunderstood the actual scope of control of the POTUS. We talked about it here well before the election - the POTUS sets tone more than anything else. Ah well...

 

[Medic007]

Did his supporters believe that he could do whatever he wanted regardless of legal and organizational limitations?

No, because we all know what a disgusting outhouse that congress is. He did get a 2nd amendment supporting supreme justice on the court and his rhetoric alone has dropped illegal border crossings. Outside of that, he can stew in his own cheesy orangeness. Do some more shit or don't.

 

[GL97]

My take is he dramatically misunderstood the actual scope of control of the POTUS. We talked about it here well before the election - the POTUS sets tone more than anything else.

I tend to agree. I also think many of his diehard supporters also misunderstand the actual scope of control of the POTUS. And I sometimes wonder if some of them would just prefer a dictator.

I also wonder though what the White House counsel's office is doing and does Trump bother to listen to them?

 

[Been Jammin]

No, because we all know what a disgusting outhouse that congress is. .

I'm not disagreeing with this sentence, but I do want to ask something. I have seen you post this line of thinking repeatedly recently. But, considering the current make up of the House and Senate, how long has it been since a POTUS was in a more advantageous position when it comes to getting house support for his policies?

I honestly don't know the answer, because I have not paid close attention, but when was the last time both the House and Senate majority were both of the same party as the POTUS? I understand that politicians suck in general, but hasn't that always been true and shouldn't Trump be well positioned to make things happen (when compared to other past POTUS?

 

[JimmyBob]

So they were told by an unknown person about an unknown phone call about a conversation that none of them heard. Yea sounds credible. According to CNN these are professional journalists.

Sounds like a cluster of monkeys wanting to be the first in line to f*k the football; but then again, it's CNN and their definition of "professional" ranks somewhere between a preemie ejac and whale shit.

 

[GL97]

I honestly don't know the answer, because I have not paid close attention, but when was the last time both the House and Senate majority were both of the same party as the POTUS?

2009-2011

For Republicans, 2001-2007.

But you are right, Trump and the Republicans clearly have the advantage right now politically. And yet, Trump has relied mainly on executive orders to push his agenda.

 

[Medic007]

I'm not disagreeing with this sentence, but I do want to ask something. I have seen you post this line of thinking repeatedly recently. But, considering the current make up of the House and Senate, how long has it been since a POTUS was in a more advantageous position when it comes to getting house support for his policies?

Think Obamacare. Obama had the House and Senate for 2 years.

I dislike conservative politicians because I have nothing in common with their platform. I began to have a similar dislike of the Democrat politicians of the new left during the Obama campaign in 2008 and heavily evident during his 2 terms.


You're probably not much different from me in philosophy at this point from what I gather from your posts.

 

[GL97]

I began to have a similar dislike of the Democrat politicians of the new left during the Obama campaign in 2008 and heavily evident during his 2 terms.

Which Democrat politicians did you use to like?

 

[davidallen]

I also wonder though what the White House counsel's office is doing and does Trump bother to listen to them?

If you believe press speculation the WH Counsels Office is midway through reviewing impeachment defense strategies and processes...

 

[PDT816]

GL,

What laws have been broken that led to Comey's involvement in the Russian/election scenario?

 

[imprimis]

Alan Dershowitz said he hasn't seen where any laws have been broken.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

GL,

What laws have been broken that led to Comey's involvement in the Russian/election scenario?

He can't tell you. The special ivestigator doesn't even know that. The SI's new title should be special guesser or the left's mood tester it would be more accurate.

 

[Been Jammin]

Why are we still arguing about this?

The investigation is underway. When it is finished, we will have our answers. I, honestly, don't expect any criminal charges to be filed against Trump. I won't be surprised if they find wrongdoing by one or more people closely tied to him. (that does not necessarily mean criminal charges). But, I don't know one way or the other and I am happy to wait and see what happens.

The right can whine all they want about there being an investigation and the left can fist pump all they want, but it is what it is.

 

[Alpha Poke]

The dems better hope it sticks because a Trump that comes out the other side of this unscathed is likely to go scorched earth after the Clintons. I don't think libs want any light to shine there.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

You have to have something to investigation before you investigate. The lefts mood tester is trying to find an office to waste taxpayer dollars out of right now. After that he will have the government pay for subscriptions to the NY Times, Wash Po, and LA Times. He will then have the government install a direct line to Obama and the mad cow. After that it will be sit back and let the papers do your work for you. As long the internet doesn't go down, there is free coffee and donuts and his chair is half way comfortable he isn't going to do anything or go anywhere. Occasionally he will leak something to the mad cow for ratings and to keep his name in the news but that's about it. It will go just like the Starr investigation. When he can't find something he will widen the perameters.

Technically he should use the time to investigate both Trump, Hillary, Obama and Congress for ties and see what he gets. It would increase his chances of finding something and make him more productive. Now that would be fun.

 

[CowboyJD]

You have to have something to investigation before you investigate.

All you need is reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed or is being committed.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

 

[purkey]

it's all a bunch of wacky and will be dismissed by the next world war 3 headlines...trump kissed his sister, or trump blah blah blah. It's just a bunch of lyin' politicians trying to gain an advantage by throwing anything they can on the wall and not caring if it's fact, truth, or whatever. This has become the new normal and it may not go away anytime soon. It is damaging the country more than people think. All for one side or the other to gain control. It's a huge cluster...and hannity is just a cheerleader like the other 1,500 or so for the left. We will never know the truth about any of this crap because of someone's finger on the scale.