Next step into Trump's Shell game

[sammyk]

is to get us into a war. I can see it happening it would deflect major attention away from Russia and make questioning him a lot harder. So get ready for a war guys

 

[tulla]

is to get us into a war. I can see it happening it would deflect major attention away from Russia and make questioning him a lot harder. So get ready for a war guys

His temperament is a huge concern. Frustrated over Sessions, etc. at the end of laste week, he sends out very damaging (to him and to the country) tweets at 6:00am on Sat. morning. Who wants a president with no impulse control?

Interesting to note that there were no cameras present today when he signed the new EO--in stark contrast to laste month when each such signing was a huge photo op. Someone realizes he tweeted himself into a corner where, if questioned, he has to acknowledge that he made the accusation against Obama with no more evidence than what he got from right-wing media or that the FBI was able to convince the federal panel that there was sufficient evidence to warrant a tap--something that Comey says the FBI didn't do. So Trump is hiding today.

 

[sammyk]

Well one of two things are going to happen

1. He will have to answer about the Obama wire taps. If he made a false statement (Lied) he will have to answer for that.

2. If there were wire taps that means he may be up sh!t Creek because there was a reason for him to be monitored


Either way this guy is awful

 

[njfan47]

For either Tulla or Sammy, would there have been any previous instances of the Obama Administration having wire tapped anyone? Or is this claim completely out of left field?

And, Sammy, what are the terms of your war prediction. Will it happen in one year, two years, or more? Or, wouldn't it have to happen very soon since Trump is sure to be impeached?

 

[tulla]

For either Tulla or Sammy, would there have been any previous instances of the Obama Administration having wire tapped anyone? Or is this claim completely out of left field?

And, Sammy, what are the terms of your war prediction. Will it happen in one year, two years, or more? Or, wouldn't it have to happen very soon since Trump is sure to be impeached?

If your question is whether there were any wiretaps that received appropriate and necessary legal approval in the Obama administration, I'm next to certain that the answer is yes. But Trump's claim is that Obama himself ordered a wiretap of Trump--in a 6:00 am series of tweets that impugned Obama's character and questioned his mental health. Question one is whether Trump's tweets don't call into question his judgment and even his own stability. Question two is what the evidence is for Trump's extraordinary claims. Question three, given that he has access to all information about wiretaps carried out by federal agencies and can make that information public, is why he won't produce such information.

He made an unqualified statement about Obama--there wasn't the slightest indication that he merely suspected he was the object of a wiretap ordered by Obama. But all his spokespeople have been trying to misrepresent what he said as an "if" statement--as if Trump did not make the statement that he did. So why do you think Spicer did not go before a camera today and why do you think Trump has chosen to be inaccessible today even though his long-promised and much delayed (to allow him to "bask" in the glory resulting from his reading from a teleprompter for an hour without boasting about his "landslide" or blasting the "fake news media") executive order was has been issued?

Really, who could have made all this up? Honestly, do you want a president who tweets such an accusation against his predecessor and then shortly after tweets about "The Apprentice?" Where do you think the man's head is?

 

[Stalker]

That we could go to war in such volatile times is not a revelation!
http://time.com/4298318/iraq-us-troops-barack-obama-mosul-isis/


It could flash anywhere (from DOD)
http://time.com/4075458/afghanistan-drawdown-obama-troops/

 

[njfan47]

If your question is whether there were any wiretaps that received appropriate and necessary legal approval in the Obama administration, I'm next to certain that the answer is yes. But Trump's claim is that Obama himself ordered a wiretap of Trump--in a 6:00 am series of tweets that impugned Obama's character and questioned his mental health. Question one is whether Trump's tweets don't call into question his judgment and even his own stability. Question two is what the evidence is for Trump's extraordinary claims. Question three, given that he has access to all information about wiretaps carried out by federal agencies and can make that information public, is why he won't produce such information.

He made an unqualified statement about Obama--there wasn't the slightest indication that he merely suspected he was the object of a wiretap ordered by Obama. But all his spokespeople have been trying to misrepresent what he said as an "if" statement--as if Trump did not make the statement that he did. So why do you think Spicer did not go before a camera today and why do you think Trump has chosen to be inaccessible today even though his long-promised and much delayed (to allow him to "bask" in the glory resulting from his reading from a teleprompter for an hour without boasting about his "landslide" or blasting the "fake news media") executive order was has been issued?

Really, who could have made all this up? Honestly, do you want a president who tweets such an accusation against his predecessor and then shortly after tweets about "The Apprentice?" Where do you think the man's head is?

1. The time of the tweets is important? Why?
2. You never answered the question about Obama's wiretap history. He did it several times including to Angela Merkel and many other countries. Remember, Merkel was outraged?

Now, I agree that this information should not come out by tweets from the president. Little about Trump is conventional. But, if he's driving the left crazy (or crazier), it's fine with me.

Back to the issue, it would not surprise me at all if Obama had done this. Let's let things settle out. Obama has to be worried if this is, in fact, true.

One other issue and I didn't see the CBS, NBC, ABC news this weekend, but I would bet that they were on the defensive, rather than taking a look at the history of Obama's wiretapping issues, in other words, a look at this story from all angles.

 

[tulla]

1. The time of the tweets is important? Why?
2. You never answered the question about Obama's wiretap history. He did it several times including to Angela Merkel and many other countries. Remember, Merkel was outraged?

Now, I agree that this information should not come out by tweets from the president. Little about Trump is conventional. But, if he's driving the left crazy (or crazier), it's fine with me.

Back to the issue, it would not surprise me at all if Obama had done this. Let's let things settle out. Obama has to be worried if this is, in fact, true.

One other issue and I didn't see the CBS, NBC, ABC news this weekend, but I would bet that they were on the defensive, rather than taking a look at the history of Obama's wiretapping issues, in other words, a look at this story from all angles.

I answered the question about wiretaps in the Obama administration. I said it likely happened. Not sure if Obama ordered the tap on Merkel, but there's a huge difference between tapping a foreign leader and tapping a U.S. citizen, especially one running for president. I understand the law makes the distinction quite clear.

I'm not focused on the time of the tweets, but the timing (as has been the case with many of his tweets) does make me wonder whether Trump is sleeping enough, whether he has adequate impulse control, etc. Does it not concern you that the president is sending out these tweets, probably when he is all alone, and then tweeting about Arnold S? Does it not suggest something disturbing about where his head is?f

Trump's actions are of concern to more than the left. I just saw Bill Kristol expressing great alarm over Trump's behavior. And Comey has made his views known. I'll grant you though, that most Republicans have made Faustian bargains, reversed themselves on most of their principles, and decided to be deaf, blind, and dumb.

Obama is not worried--except about the country.

Trump blew up at his own team on Friday, went to Florida in a huff or a rage, and then spends a fair bit of Saturday morning issuing tweets that may nourish and animate his base but that make him look ridiculous to the rest of the country and the world.

 

[njfan47]

I answered the question about wiretaps in the Obama administration. I said it likely happened. Not sure if Obama ordered the tap on Merkel, but there's a huge difference between tapping a foreign leader and tapping a U.S. citizen, especially one running for president. I understand the law makes the distinction quite clear.

I'm not focused on the time of the tweets, but the timing (as has been the case with many of his tweets) does make me wonder whether Trump is sleeping enough, whether he has adequate impulse control, etc. Does it not concern you that the president is sending out these tweets, probably when he is all alone, and then tweeting about Arnold S? Does it not suggest something disturbing about where his head is?f

Trump's actions are of concern to more than the left. I just saw Bill Kristol expressing great alarm over Trump's behavior. And Comey has made his views known. I'll grant you though, that most Republicans have made Faustian bargains, reversed themselves on most of their principles, and decided to be deaf, blind, and dumb.

Obama is not worried--except about the country.

Trump blew up at his own team on Friday, went to Florida in a huff or a rage, and then spends a fair bit of Saturday morning issuing tweets that may nourish and animate his base but that make him look ridiculous to the rest of the country and the world.

"it likely happened." It's fact that Obama wiretapped Merkel and others. There is no likely.

And your statement about what you call "necessary legal approval" shows that you don't understand the law. A president may order electronic surveillance without a court order if the goal to acquire foreign intelligence.

Remember when James Rosen of Fox News was also wiretapped? The Associated Press was also wire tapped. Obama has a history here.

Regarding your comments about Bill Kristol and other Washington types, I guess you don't understand they are establishment Washington types. Trump is anti-establishment and Kristol and his ilk are never going to support Trump. It's just that simple.

Regarding this issue, we just need to let it play out. Please realize, Tulla, that you aren't going to see fair reporting on your media. I'm sure they gave the story no context by omitting Obama's vast wiretapping activities.

 

[tulla]

"it likely happened." It's fact that Obama wiretapped Merkel and others. There is no likely.

And your statement about what you call "necessary legal approval" shows that you don't understand the law. A president may order electronic surveillance without a court order if the goal to acquire foreign intelligence.

Remember when James Rosen of Fox News was also wiretapped? The Associated Press was also wire tapped. Obama has a history here.

Regarding your comments about Bill Kristol and other Washington types, I guess you don't understand they are establishment Washington types. Trump is anti-establishment and Kristol and his ilk are never going to support Trump. It's just that simple.

Regarding this issue, we just need to let it play out. Please realize, Tulla, that you aren't going to see fair reporting on your media. I'm sure they gave the story no context by omitting Obama's vast wiretapping activities.

Did Obama give the order to wiretap Merkel? I know U.S. intelligence did, but I don't know if the president has to approve all such operations. Did Obama initiate the practice of using such surveillance of foreign leaders? Did the U.S. do it more often under Obama than it did under previous presidents? I don't know the answers, but Trump supporters seem to think Obama was a kind of sorcerer.

When I mentioned the necessity of getting legal approval, I was referring to wiretapping Americans. So far no one in the Trump administration has indicated agreement with Trump's statement that Obama ordered or approved of any tapping of Trump's phone. I saw Michael Hayden on both Fox and CNN say he thought Trump forgot he was president when he sent his tweets. A remarkable statement. But I guess anything Hayden says can be dismissed because he's part of the establishment (even though he was replaced as Dir. of he CIA in the first month of the Obama admin.).

The contradictions in this administration are astounding. A couple of weeks ago Trump was insisting that his first EO about immigration and refugees had to enacted so swiftly because otherwise very dangerous people would get into the U.S. and try to do terrible things. But the new EO could be delayed, according to the White House, to allow Trump to bask in the triumph of his relatively coherent address last week. And now we are told the new EO won't take effect for nearly two weeks. Such contradictions can't be logically explained.

Doesn't the fact that Trump has such a long history of lying or showing indifference to facts concern you? (I'm referring to his long promotion of birthirism, his statements about Muslims in N.J. celebrating "on television" the 9/11 attacks, his claims about Ted Cruz's father, his claims about 3-5 million fraudulent votes--where is that promised commission?, his claims about the size of his electoral victory, his claim about the crime rate, his statement about 94 million Americans being unemployed etc.) What's equally remarkable is that he never acknowledges he was wrong. I guess his ego couldn't handle doing the right thing.

 

[njfan47]

Did Obama give the order to wiretap Merkel? I know U.S. intelligence did, but I don't know if the president has to approve all such operations. Did Obama initiate the practice of using such surveillance of foreign leaders? Did the U.S. do it more often under Obama than it did under previous presidents? I don't know the answers, but Trump supporters seem to think Obama was a kind of sorcerer.

When I mentioned the necessity of getting legal approval, I was referring to wiretapping Americans. So far no one in the Trump administration has indicated agreement with Trump's statement that Obama ordered or approved of any tapping of Trump's phone. I saw Michael Hayden on both Fox and CNN say he thought Trump forgot he was president when he sent his tweets. A remarkable statement. But I guess anything Hayden says can be dismissed because he's part of the establishment (even though he was replaced as Dir. of he CIA in the first month of the Obama admin.).

The contradictions in this administration are astounding. A couple of weeks ago Trump was insisting that his first EO about immigration and refugees had to enacted so swiftly because otherwise very dangerous people would get into the U.S. and try to do terrible things. But the new EO could be delayed, according to the White House, to allow Trump to bask in the triumph of his relatively coherent address last week. And now we are told the new EO won't take effect for nearly two weeks. Such contradictions can't be logically explained.

Doesn't the fact that Trump has such a long history of lying or showing indifference to facts concern you? (I'm referring to his long promotion of birthirism, his statements about Muslims in N.J. celebrating "on television" the 9/11 attacks, his claims about Ted Cruz's father, his claims about 3-5 million fraudulent votes--where is that promised commission?, his claims about the size of his electoral victory, his claim about the crime rate, his statement about 94 million Americans being unemployed etc.) What's equally remarkable is that he never acknowledges he was wrong. I guess his ego couldn't handle doing the right thing.

Clearly, you and a lot of others didn't understand the law when they originally commented. That's ok, you had a lot of company from other establishment folks.

Surely, you realize the amount of nitpicking that you are doing about style, timing, etc. didn't exist when Obama was president. Maybe we are very different, but I prefer to comment on major issues, things that are impactful. Based on our past conversations, I would have thought the same would be true of you.

Inherent in your comments is the lack of information that we previously discussed, based on news sources. I am referring specifically to the Muslims celebrating in New Jersey after the 9/11 attacks. I saw it with my own eyes on TV. And anyone who knows anything about Paterson, NJ knows this is not a stretch at all. Why Fox failed to come forward with the video is a mystery. But I recall it vividly and my wife does, as well. As far as the fraudulent votes, there is no doubt about it. The number is in question and it's questionable as to why he even brought this up, but to think that it doesn't go on is to have one's head in the sand.

A lot of your claims are on the mark, but I don't recall seeing any comments from you when Obama said there was "not a smidgen of corruption" regarding the IRS scandal. Or, perhaps you were not aware that he ever made that statement!

 

[reluctant_to_comment]

I am referring specifically to the Muslims celebrating in New Jersey after the 9/11 attacks. I saw it with my own eyes on TV.

That's a flat out lie and proven over and over again. Stay away from Breitbart and InfoWars.

EVERYTHING is on YouTube. Show me the video. I'm not talking about 2 random guys. Trump said he saw a video of "thousands in NJ".

 

[tulla]

Clearly, you and a lot of others didn't understand the law when they originally commented. That's ok, you had a lot of company from other establishment folks.

Surely, you realize the amount of nitpicking that you are doing about style, timing, etc. didn't exist when Obama was president. Maybe we are very different, but I prefer to comment on major issues, things that are impactful. Based on our past conversations, I would have thought the same would be true of you.

Inherent in your comments is the lack of information that we previously discussed, based on news sources. I am referring specifically to the Muslims celebrating in New Jersey after the 9/11 attacks. I saw it with my own eyes on TV. And anyone who knows anything about Paterson, NJ knows this is not a stretch at all. Why Fox failed to come forward with the video is a mystery. But I recall it vividly and my wife does, as well. As far as the fraudulent votes, there is no doubt about it. The number is in question and it's questionable as to why he even brought this up, but to think that it doesn't go on is to have one's head in the sand.

A lot of your claims are on the mark, but I don't recall seeing any comments from you when Obama said there was "not a smidgen of corruption" regarding the IRS scandal. Or, perhaps you were not aware that he ever made that statement!

nj, I stayed off all political comment sections/boards before the election. For the most part they seemed full of insults and featured a lot of people who agreed with one another stoking each other's outrage. Philly.com featured lots of vile comments. I would agree that the blinkered views weren't all on one side of the political spectrum. But after the election I decided to engage with people with whom I don't agree because I think we all need to do that more. But maybe like you, I don't want to do it for hours every day.

About Muslims in Jersey celebrating 9/11 and its being captured on TV: of course I don't know what you recall seeing but maybe it's possible it was a very small group that looked bigger on TV or maybe it was footage from some earlier event. It's hard to imagine that Fox would not make such footage available--if they have it--and it's really hard to believe that with all his money and power Trump wouldn't be able to get his hands on the footage.

 

[njfan47]

nj, I stayed off all political comment sections/boards before the election. For the most part they seemed full of insults and featured a lot of people who agreed with one another stoking each other's outrage. Philly.com featured lots of vile comments. I would agree that the blinkered views weren't all on one side of the political spectrum. But after the election I decided to engage with people with whom I don't agree because I think we all need to do that more. But maybe like you, I don't want to do it for hours every day.

About Muslims in Jersey celebrating 9/11 and its being captured on TV: of course I don't know what you recall seeing but maybe it's possible it was a very small group that looked bigger on TV or maybe it was footage from some earlier event. It's hard to imagine that Fox would not make such footage available--if they have it--and it's really hard to believe that with all his money and power Trump wouldn't be able to get his hands on the footage.

Tulla, agreed on the several hours per day on this board. I don't want to be a fulltime employee of the board like Sammy. The guy needs to get a shrink instead of using this board to vent.

The group was probably about 40-50 people in Paterson, NJ. So, Trump was exaggerating, as usual. But the point isn't really about the number of people. Whether it's 40 or 2,000, it's a very small percentage of the USA popluation; however, the point is that residents and possibly citizens would celebrate an event like this. Trump isn't wrong about this event, as you guys want to believe. Again, anyone who knows parts of Paterson, Newark, Elizabeth, etc. would be shocked by this; those of us who are familiar with those cities were not surprised one bit.

 

[sammyk]

is to get us into a war. I can see it happening it would deflect major attention away from Russia and make questioning him a lot harder. So get ready for a war guys

Remember when I posted this back a few months ago well here it is. Next up is an attack on US soil from an unknown terrorist just watch

 

[njfan47]

Remember when I posted this back a few months ago well here it is. Next up is an attack on US soil from an unknown terrorist just watch

Ooh, Sammy Snowflake hit the jackpot. Then he comes on here and tells us about it. Nice.

How about coming to the conclusion that Trump reacted to a human atrocity committed by Assad? You weren't even capable of thinking about the entire scope of this issue. We should call you Micro-Sammy, but that will just be a secondary name since Sammy Snowflake is just too good to pass up.

All that Trump did is what Obama failed to do. This is an inherited problem that should have been taken care of. If the facts were reversed, you would be looking at this differently. But flipping a situation is not within your capability.

 

[reluctant_to_comment]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/opinion/100-days-of-horror.html

 

[sammyk]

Enter North Korea. Here is the War I was talking about to deflect attention next up some kind of attack on an American landmark like the burning of the Reichstag in Germany in the 1930's.