It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

President Trump Fires James Comey

page: 130
144
<< 127  128  129    131  132  133 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: olaru12
And "go fish" style poker doesn't interest me that much. Test your mettle at high/low Omaha for a real thrill.


That's the only Omaha game I like.

If you really want to make yourself sweat, play Razz.


They don't deal Razz here in the Rio Grande valley. What casinos have it and do they have tourny play?

Oh yeah, California! Those card rooms are killer. As much as I hate to admit it, I would be the chump in that environment.





None in my local area have a Razz game...ever. I've only found it at a card club in Minnesota.




posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone

True, Trump does sound off some outrageous things, but that is actually why some people like him. I for one, am sick and tired of people in DC treating the population like idiots or deplorables (there's a perfect example from the other side of the aisle). Normal people don't talk like politicians do. Normal people don't have speechwriters and policy experts to analyze every syllable within an inch of its life. Normal people make mistakes in word choice, because they're speaking from the heart, not from the teleprompter.

But normal people are still able to talk to normal people and understand each other. We listen to what is said, not what words are used. 'Loose' speech is still legal.

So here comes a candidate who talks like we do, and says the things we have been saying. And behind him is this hoard that despises him for being like us. Why in the name of Robert E. Lee would anyone support someone who obviously hates everything about them?

That's why Trump is bulletproof. When someone talks about how he's xenophobic because he wants to ban a religion, when I clearly understood he meant a culture of violence, they're talking about me. When they call Trump a sexist over locker room talk, they're calling me a sexist. When they call Trump a racist without a shred of evidence, they're calling me a racist.

Now multiply that by the number who voted for him. That's a lot of people being hated on.

I first saw this phenomenon back when Limbaugh started getting popular. I tuned in to see what the noise was about, and here was a guy saying a lot of things I had been saying! Then I started listening to his detractors making childish fun of his opinions, his weight, his looks, everything about him. In my mind, they were saying those things about me... and I didn't want to hear them and tuned them out.

For years, I remember hearing the complaints about how talk radio was primarily right-wing... and the ones crying about it couldn't seem to understand why. I understood. I wanted to listen to people who didn't despise everything about me.

I have to stop here for a sidenote... as I quit listening to left-wing haters, I soon learned that Rush Limbaugh was indeed full of crap. I haven't listened to him in almost 20 years. I probably would have noticed his BS-to-weight ratio sooner had it not been for the left-wing children.

Now we have the same thing happening with Trump. He's right; he really could shoot someone in broad daylight in the middle of 5th Avenue and not lose his supporters. Because his supporters have nowhere else to go.

So yes, you're right... Trump misspeaks. Trump is inexperienced. Trump gets under people's skin. Trump has an ego.

But Trump's detractors hate everything about me, everything about millions of honest, hard-working Americans. I'll take the ego any day over overt hatred.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Wow. Great, well-balanced post!



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:24 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Thank you!

Am I right?

I think those of us who feel that way need to speak out about it. I really don't give a diseased rat's rump what someone thinks of me... but I'll be damned if I'll support anyone who despises me that bad.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:38 PM
link   
I'm just stunned that no one in the media (mainstream or otherwise) seem to be talking about the ethics and morality of having Donald Trump replace the head of the FBI who he just fired (or the ethics or morals of the actual firing), when the FBI are still running an active investigation into his campaign.

This job of hiring the replacement should go to the most senior person in Government not involved with the campaign at all. In this case, that would be Paul Ryan, or it should be referred to a Senate subcommittee due to massive conflict of interest on the part of the President.

The firing of Comey should have been referred to a Senate sub committee, given the nature of the FBI investigation. Donald Trump's firing of the head of the agency that is investigating him is a massive moral and ethical dilemma. Unfortunately, the party he represents seem to have zero morals or ethics.

Had Donald Trump of referred Comey to a Senate Sub Committee, and presented his case on why he should have been fired, then they could have made that decision for him and it would have been both morally and ethically justified.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: alphabetaone

True, Trump does sound off some outrageous things, but that is actually why some people like him. I for one, am sick and tired of people in DC treating the population like idiots or deplorables (there's a perfect example from the other side of the aisle). Normal people don't talk like politicians do. Normal people don't have speechwriters and policy experts to analyze every syllable within an inch of its life. Normal people make mistakes in word choice, because they're speaking from the heart, not from the teleprompter.

But normal people are still able to talk to normal people and understand each other. We listen to what is said, not what words are used. 'Loose' speech is still legal.

So here comes a candidate who talks like we do, and says the things we have been saying. And behind him is this hoard that despises him for being like us. Why in the name of Robert E. Lee would anyone support someone who obviously hates everything about them?

That's why Trump is bulletproof. When someone talks about how he's xenophobic because he wants to ban a religion, when I clearly understood he meant a culture of violence, they're talking about me. When they call Trump a sexist over locker room talk, they're calling me a sexist. When they call Trump a racist without a shred of evidence, they're calling me a racist.

Now multiply that by the number who voted for him. That's a lot of people being hated on.

I first saw this phenomenon back when Limbaugh started getting popular. I tuned in to see what the noise was about, and here was a guy saying a lot of things I had been saying! Then I started listening to his detractors making childish fun of his opinions, his weight, his looks, everything about him. In my mind, they were saying those things about me... and I didn't want to hear them and tuned them out.

For years, I remember hearing the complaints about how talk radio was primarily right-wing... and the ones crying about it couldn't seem to understand why. I understood. I wanted to listen to people who didn't despise everything about me.

I have to stop here for a sidenote... as I quit listening to left-wing haters, I soon learned that Rush Limbaugh was indeed full of crap. I haven't listened to him in almost 20 years. I probably would have noticed his BS-to-weight ratio sooner had it not been for the left-wing children.

Now we have the same thing happening with Trump. He's right; he really could shoot someone in broad daylight in the middle of 5th Avenue and not lose his supporters. Because his supporters have nowhere else to go.

So yes, you're right... Trump misspeaks. Trump is inexperienced. Trump gets under people's skin. Trump has an ego.

But Trump's detractors hate everything about me, everything about millions of honest, hard-working Americans. I'll take the ego any day over overt hatred.

TheRedneck





Just because Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump are "Saying things you've been saying" doesn't make them right. If you're saying the same things, then many of your beliefs are against the very Constitution of the country that you claim to love.

You lot all claim to be Patriots. But being a Patriot first and foremost means belief in the Constitution. The First Amendment is written to ensure that people who hold differing opinions from yours also have a voice, and that people like you who may have a different view point from THEM also have a voice.

It doesn't mean that one group's will is imposed on the entire population without so much as a by your leave. Yes, Trump, Limbaugh and many others on the far right may be saying what people are saying. And yes, it may SEEM that everyone you know is saying the same thing.

That's because you're refusing to have simple discussions with people with opposing viewpoints to your own, which is the very foundation of the Constitution of the United States that the average Donald Trump supporter claims to hold so dear.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

and yet its the left, and not the right, who is violently ending free speech to anyone who holds a differing opinion.



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Thank you for proving my point so well.

Where was this concern for differing views over the last eight years? Nowhere. Anyone who disagreed with the policies of the Obama administration was despised and potentially attacked. You hated me then, and you hate me now.

There is no redemption for Trump, me, or anyone you deem 'you oeople' in your eyes. Our crime is literally existence.

Good luck with eradicating us. You can't, and even if you could, your hatred would simply turn to someone else.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 13 2017 @ 11:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: alphabetaone


But Trump's detractors hate everything about me, everything about millions of honest, hard-working Americans. I'll take the ego any day over overt hatred.

TheRedneck




You know, this is an absolutely excellent point (albeit a bit off-topic with respect to the Jim Comey thing, but honestly they almost become one in the same) and one that should be addressed with far more exuberance than toe'ing party lines on either side.

I'm of the firm belief, as I have been for years, that it's extremely in-American to only support one party. I support any party that makes sense and seems responsible. This leads right into what you have just said, that some people tend to show disgust for whomever they are not. This could be race, religion, or in this case political alignment. We should be fighting together AS Americans, but instead we're killing each other either at gunpoint or at pen-point and the argument always seems to be a self-fulling dilution back to a party line debate.

My personal disdain is with Trump because for starters he isn't what I thought he was when I voted for him, but it's NOT with anyone who is Liberal, Conservative or otherwise.

Again, off-topic but just to share a little comedy about Trump, here is a image capture of a transcript the Economist had with the President which is yet another reason for ME that I don't trust the guy, but is absolutely hysterical no matter your political leaning:



"It's not a negotiation! But............it is?!"

To me, it gets no better than this.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone


I support any party that makes sense and seems responsible. This leads right into what you have just said, that some people tend to show disgust for whomever they are not. This could be race, religion, or in this case political alignment. We should be fighting together AS Americans, but instead we're killing each other either at gunpoint or at pen-point and the argument always seems to be a self-fulling dilution back to a party line debate.

I support any person who will do thusly. Parties are not dependable. It has been said that the person may be intelligent and reasonable, but people are uncontrollable, dangerous, unpredictable animals. I believe that is true, and a party is by definition a group of people.

That said, I do agree with your sentiment. I am regularly accused of being a Republican lately, but the simple truth is that I examine each issue and decide what I think of it... the thoughts of any group of people are irrelevant. Lately, the Republicans tend to ally with my positions much more than the Democrats, but that has nothing to do with party loyalty and everything to do with loyalty to my core beliefs. I am an individual quite capable of thinking for myself.

I am also quite capable of changing my mind... but I do require relevant facts to do so. It seems relevant facts are regularly replaced by innuendo, fantasy, and supposition today.

Getting back to the actual topic, though... I have had major concerns over Comey since his speech where he recommended not prosecuting Hillary. Had he stated there was not enough evidence in his opinion to recommend prosecution, I would have been only suspicious. But he recommended not prosecuting her. That's not the same thing; no investigator recommends against prosecution. They either recommend prosecution or not. He also listed reasons why she should have been prosecuted... seriously? Who investigates an allegation, finds all the necessary evidence to prove the allegation, then makes a blanket decision outside of their jurisdiction to not prosecute?

IMO, a criminal, that's who.

Trump fired Comey only two weeks after Rosenstein was confirmed, exactly the amount of time I suspect a motivated person to need in order to uncover problems in such an organization. The decision was exactly what many Democrats had recently called for. But those same Democrats are now decrying the decision.

Their reasoning is one issue: the Russia investigation. I want to know if and how Russia interfered with the election myself, but after several months we still have only one person, Flynn, who has even been charged with wrongdoing. We have statements from government officials that Trump himself is not under investigation, and no evidence presented that he did anything illegal even after months of investigation. Without such evidence, without a formal admission that Trump himself is under investigation for Russian ties, Trump is innocent of any such charges according to the law.

Add in the fact that it is the same people who have opposed Trump at every turn that are still making implications that he is guilty of collusion with Russia... and I simply do not believe them. At this point, declaring Trump guilty of any collusion is akin in my mind to just staring they don't like Trump. Now, if evidence of collusion is uncovered tomorrow, I will analyze the situation again and possibly revise my position... but I will not do so over innuendo or fantasy from those who obviously hate me so much for being me.

My personal belief is that Comey may have been the key to a lot of corruption in DC, and if so, Trump is doing one thing I wanted: draining the swamp, aka exposing government corruption wherever it may lie.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Tillerson just signed onto the Arctic Climate Affirmation.

Link

I have this sense that Trump is going to waffle and not pull out of the Paris Agreement.

Too much money to be made there.

He doesn't say much aboout China eating our lunch anymore.

He's just another politician that won't do what he said he was going to do.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 12:41 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone


"It's not a negotiation! But............it is?!"

Hahaha, I can see where that would be confusing, because it's meant to be!

That's actually a common and effective tactic in negotiation. Keep your opponent guessing. I use something similar when car shopping. I never make absolute statements until the deal is made. I might be wanting to trade my present car in, but when the salesman asks me if I do, I always say something like "probably not... really hadn't thought about it." The idea is that I do not want to give the salesman anywhere in the deal to hide extra costs. I want the best price on his car, then his best price on mine. If I admit early that I plan on doing a trade, he can make a wonderful price on his car by undercutting me on mine.

Trump is admitting it's a negotiation tactic, but without admitting it's a negotiating tactic. He's very good at this. He will never give a straight answer until he has the deal he wants, in this case a positive interview.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Your claim of support for First Amendment rights rings just a tad bit hollow. Your all for free expression so long as it jibes with yours...

I'd ask where this concern was for the past eight years when people like myself, who expressed concerns about the direction the country was headed...kinda like a patriot would--yet more than once, I was shouted down, called rather disgusting names, and essentially told by a major political party that my values, my beliefs, even my life were of no importance.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Thanks for the heads-up.

I scanned over the agreement. It does make some good goals... reduce soot and methane contamination, preserve the environment, ensure shipping does not overly interfere with native culture... but I am also a bit suspicious. I find my own suspicions troubling, because they may well be rooted in previous experience with previous administration's.

The signature isn't binding a'la a treaty, anyway... that would require a signature from Trump himself. With Tillerson's signature it is little more that a written 'gentleman's agreement.'

I will say, if Trump does sign the Paris Accord, my respect for Trump will suffer a serious hit. One of the things I expected was that the silliness surrounding carbon dioxide would stop. Tillerson's signature does not implement any carbon dioxide restrictions, but the Paris Accord does.

TheRedneck

edit on 5/14/2017 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 01:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Yes, if he waffles on the Paris Accord, I will be mighty disappointed to say the least.

I don't know why he surrounded himself with people like Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Carter Page and even Flynn.

It just doesn't look good. My hope is they wrap up these investigations right quick, cause right now, nothing is getting done.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 04:36 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

I dont think he will.. Tillerson just signed a document committing to it.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 07:23 AM
link   
What is going on with this clown Claude Tylor, this supposedly low grade once employee of the Clintons or that is what he claim, first comes with some garbage tweets about know something on Trump and Russia to now claim that Trump has been indicted by a FISA court.

Wait a minute, this clown have not clue what a FISA court is and neither how indictments are handle by the Justice Department.

This news are going wild and rampant in all those anti Trump sites all over the net.

Is becoming crazy.



posted on May, 14 2017 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
I'm just stunned that no one in the media (mainstream or otherwise) seem to be talking about the ethics and morality of having Donald Trump replace the head of the FBI who he just fired (or the ethics or morals of the actual firing), when the FBI are still running an active investigation into his campaign.

This job of hiring the replacement should go to the most senior person in Government not involved with the campaign at all. In this case, that would be Paul Ryan, or it should be referred to a Senate subcommittee due to massive conflict of interest on the part of the President.

The firing of Comey should have been referred to a Senate sub committee, given the nature of the FBI investigation. Donald Trump's firing of the head of the agency that is investigating him is a massive moral and ethical dilemma. Unfortunately, the party he represents seem to have zero morals or ethics.

Had Donald Trump of referred Comey to a Senate Sub Committee, and presented his case on why he should have been fired, then they could have made that decision for him and it would have been both morally and ethically justified.



Why? HE DOESN'T NEED TO DO THAT.

All this Trump BS is about control.

They will never control him or make him do anything by bullying.

Cooperation would be the best way but no, the left wants to keep being idiots.




posted on May, 14 2017 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

I think they figure they can stop Trump with the fake Russia story. As long as hes seen as fighting allegations even if they ar false means he cant get anything done.





posted on May, 14 2017 @ 08:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: babybunnies
I'm just stunned that no one in the media (mainstream or otherwise) seem to be talking about the ethics and morality of having Donald Trump replace the head of the FBI who he just fired (or the ethics or morals of the actual firing), when the FBI are still running an active investigation into his campaign.

This job of hiring the replacement should go to the most senior person in Government not involved with the campaign at all. In this case, that would be Paul Ryan, or it should be referred to a Senate subcommittee due to massive conflict of interest on the part of the President.

The firing of Comey should have been referred to a Senate sub committee, given the nature of the FBI investigation. Donald Trump's firing of the head of the agency that is investigating him is a massive moral and ethical dilemma. Unfortunately, the party he represents seem to have zero morals or ethics.

Had Donald Trump of referred Comey to a Senate Sub Committee, and presented his case on why he should have been fired, then they could have made that decision for him and it would have been both morally and ethically justified.



Why? HE DOESN'T NEED TO DO THAT.

All this Trump BS is about control.

They will never control him or make him do anything by bullying.

Cooperation would be the best way but no, the left wants to keep being idiots.



The Left?

His own party has no confidence in him and his advisers. The oval office is in total chaos. He can't even get his own people to cooperate. Sad, believe me.

www.rawstory.com...
edit on 14-5-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
144
<< 127  128  129    131  132  133 >>

log in

join