Bloomberg releases full transcript of the Trump interview

A good read, but be ready to set aside a lot of time. I run a very high resolution on my main monitor and it is about 30 pages long for me. I wrote about this interview yesterday when it was reported that Trump said AG Sessions, his job, was safe until November. The article that is now released shows that whole conversation and shows that what was reported was accurate, despite calls that it was taken out of context.

It was reported that the President said that the AG's job was safe until the elections in November and that he declined to comment on it any more. That was reported and that is exactly what happened. Some members also commented and thought the transcript would never be released -- I guess it takes a day to type all this up.

Enjoy.

Bloomberg Trump Transcript

Snippet, for me about 14 pages in:

BLOOMBERG: On Jeff Sessions, would it be fair to say that Jeff Sessions will be A.G. until at least the mid-terms?

TRUMP: I would – I would think so, yeah. I would think so.

BLOOMBERG: Then how many days afterwards?

TRUMP: Oh, I don’t – I don’t even want to get into it. Look. I just want people to do their jobs. I have a great cabinet. I’m really happy with my cabinet. I’ve made some replacements. Mike Pompeo’s becoming a star. You look at my cabinet members, we have really great cabinet members. There are those that say this is the best cabinet ever assembled. We really have great – and you’ve heard that, Sarah, too. We hear it a lot.

[...]

BLOOMBERG: But on the other half of that is, maybe Jeff Sessions might not necessarily be safe after the midterms?

TRUMP: I don’t want to comment on it. Look, I just would love to have him do a great job. And I’d love to have him look at the other side. And I have purposely – and there’s no reason for me to do this – I could go and – you know, I mean – I’m allowed to do. You look at Article II, you look at whatever you want to look at, I’m allowed to be very much involved. This is just a witch hunt.

Bloomberg is left-center, so mostly disliked by many on ATS who are fans of the President, but the news they report are accurate in my experience. I remember there being an error they made about a year ago, but it was corrected. I'm sure we could find more, but people make mistakes. How they are handled, retracted, apologized for and people held accountable is the merit of a news agency.

The President obviously does not consider Bloomberg "Fake News" as he agreed to an interview and has not blasted it since then, so it should be safe for the fandom to read.

Anyways, the interview covers too many topics to list here so I suggest a read -- I can foresee more threads being started over this information, including Trump's stance on what he will do if subpoenaed, Russia, North Korea and so on.

Thanks for reading.


Khar

Good Strategy for bait questions.


"what will they think of next"

a reply to: Kharron

So again, Trump didn't actually say that, it was just how he answered the question.

He didn't even say Sessions was safe tomorrow. He just gave a noncommittal response. He thought so.

All I can say is I am going to craft a carefully worded suggestion that ATS add a negative star option.

Hell, I’ll help with it. All I would like in return is to remove the Obama icon on the site.

We do not have a forum for Political History, after all.

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Kharron

So again, Trump didn't actually say that, it was just how he answered the question.

He didn't even say he was safe tomorrow. He just gave a noncommittal response. He thought so.

All I can say is I am going to craft a carefully worded suggestion that ATS add a negative star option.

Hell, I’ll help with it. All I would like in return is to remove the Obama icon on the site.

We do not have a forum for Political History, after all.

Didn't say what, Lumenari?

The words are in the quote above. What did he not say?

www.bloomberg.com...

Non biased Bloomberg creating baiting titles.

I read this as, "US stocks MOVE on news of tariffs"

you see how changing that 1 word changes the entire context of the title

a reply to: Kharron
So he was asked the question, and then answered the question. But somehow someone is trying to build up hype around this??

You guys do realize there is about to be a false flag chemical weapons attack and another strike on Syria, radar sites that have gone up for a an air and ground embargo over East Syria, and we are still arguing about how certain responses are worded??

Well then, let the pages flow!!!!!!!!!!!!

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Kharron

So again, Trump didn't actually say that, it was just how he answered the question.

He didn't even say he was safe tomorrow. He just gave a noncommittal response. He thought so.

All I can say is I am going to craft a carefully worded suggestion that ATS add a negative star option.

Hell, I’ll help with it. All I would like in return is to remove the Obama icon on the site.

We do not have a forum for Political History, after all.

Didn't say what, Lumenari?

The words are in the quote above. What did he not say?

Quote to me where Trump said "Jeff Sessions is safe until November".

As opposed to Trump being asked that question and his reply is "I think so."

Because it is two different things.

The latter is someone saying maybe. The former is what you are trying to make him say.

You do know the difference between maybe and yes, do you not?

My children knew the difference around potty training time.

a reply to: Kharron
Sir, it was Bloomberg that asked Trump a question, which he responded to and then declined to further elaborate in order to save at least 58 pages of nonsense on at least 258 different web forums over two scoops of ice cream how he phrases his speech.

It is not that Trump said this, Bloomberg said it in the form of a question, and he replied to it with a simple yes.

Did they also include the Off the Record remarks they gave to the Toronto paper to publish ? Never again would I trust any reporter, if Off the Record remarks were published from previous admins, or Hollywood types, those publications would never be publishing anything again. Why Trump trusted any of those in the media is beyond me, but I guess now, there is zero trust and credibility in the media.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Kharron
So he was asked the question, and then answered the question. But somehow someone is trying to build up hype around this??

No, it was reported exactly as it was said. Nothing was embellished.

Our members, however, thought it was a nothing burger, even though this is the top law enforcement position in our country. This is not your deli lady at your grocery store, it is AG of the USA. Uncertainty about it is something to report on. Especially when removal of the person would be seen as retaliation for the choice to recuse.

The hype was that there is nothing there. Nothing to see, move along.

H Y P E B E A S T

a reply to: Kharron



30 pages huh? How many tweets is that?

The only people that listen to Bloomberg are Trump critics.

I wonder why that is.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Kharron

So again, Trump didn't actually say that, it was just how he answered the question.

He didn't even say he was safe tomorrow. He just gave a noncommittal response. He thought so.

All I can say is I am going to craft a carefully worded suggestion that ATS add a negative star option.

Hell, I’ll help with it. All I would like in return is to remove the Obama icon on the site.

We do not have a forum for Political History, after all.

Didn't say what, Lumenari?

The words are in the quote above. What did he not say?

Quote to me where Trump said "Jeff Sessions is safe until November".

Why do I have to quote the quote that is already in the OP?

BLOOMBERG: On Jeff Sessions, would it be fair to say that Jeff Sessions will be A.G. until at least the mid-terms?

TRUMP: I would – I would think so, yeah. I would think so.

BLOOMBERG: Then how many days afterwards?

TRUMP: Oh, I don’t – I don’t even want to get into it.

Is it safe to assume now that you don't read the OPs in their entirety?

Who else is in charge of firing the AG, is there someone else who should be asked or are the President's opinions on it valid?

Or are you doubting the accuracy of the President's words because he is a compulsive liar? I'm with you on that if that is it, but his words still carry meaning, even when he lies.

a reply to: Kharron
Im not going to do this, Im really not. lol, I am a bit disappointed that your full on ready to commit to the up to double digit pages numbers of literally NOTHING that this topic will generate.

Im following the #storm thats about to actually hit the fan on the Mediterranean coast this weekend. If the pages created over Trump's placement of commas or proper subject verb placement when he speaks is in the infinity, then I will know the war is raging hard over there.

originally posted by: neo96
The only people that listen to Bloomberg are Trump critics.

I wonder why that is.

It's because facts are important.

Those who don't like facts resort to Daily Caller, Gateway Pundit, True Pundit, Neon Nettle, Zero Hedge and so on. For # sake, Zero Hedge is a Bulgarian propaganda website and is believed by many here who relish in ignorance.

But we can all do better and attempt to change that.

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: Kharron

So again, Trump didn't actually say that, it was just how he answered the question.

He didn't even say he was safe tomorrow. He just gave a noncommittal response. He thought so.

All I can say is I am going to craft a carefully worded suggestion that ATS add a negative star option.

Hell, I’ll help with it. All I would like in return is to remove the Obama icon on the site.

We do not have a forum for Political History, after all.

Didn't say what, Lumenari?

The words are in the quote above. What did he not say?

Quote to me where Trump said "Jeff Sessions is safe until November".

Why do I have to quote the quote that is already in the OP?

BLOOMBERG: On Jeff Sessions, would it be fair to say that Jeff Sessions will be A.G. until at least the mid-terms?

TRUMP: I would – I would think so, yeah. I would think so.

BLOOMBERG: Then how many days afterwards?

TRUMP: Oh, I don’t – I don’t even want to get into it.

Is it safe to assume now that you don't read the OPs in their entirety?

Who else is in charge of firing the AG, is there someone else who should be asked or are the President's opinions on it valid?

Or are you doubting the accuracy of the President's words because he is a compulsive liar? I'm with you on that if that is it, but his words still carry meaning, even when he lies.

So you have no idea that there is any difference between "I think so" and "yes".

First off, quote to me where Trump said "Sessions is safe until November". Highlight those words that he said.

Secondly, when you are in court for your date rape charge, remember that I tried to point out to you the difference between "I think so" and "Yes".

I'm off your thread. Have a nice night.

a reply to: Kharron

Facts?

From a 'news' site created by a billionaire oligarch that likes to ban big gulps.

What the eff ever.

a reply to: Kharron

The AG is employed at the pleasure of the POTUS. Obviously, if POTUS detects that Sessions is a liability or not sharing the administration's vision for enforcement of standing law, he will be gone at some point. If we come out of November looking at a Dem majority in either chamber, then the time to replace Sessions is prior to the Dems actually being sworn in as the majority because we all know ANY appointee with Dem majority will be a ridiculously obstructed fiasco. If, however, the GOP retains control, the timing becomes a non-issue.

Why is this newsworthy beyond those facts?

"wait. its yes"


"no wait. i think so"


"i dont think anybody knows what the hell they're doing"