Trump Told Russians That Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure From Investigation

originally posted by: essentialtremors

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: alphabetaone

All of you who are absolutely sure that everything reported from a document no one sees but is simply read over the phone to the press is perfectly legit.

Two different Officials read the same quotes to the NYTs.

Sean Spicer did not dispute what was read to him by the NYTs.

No doubt you guys desperately WANT this to not be accurate...

But it is.

Two complete strangers can tell you that I'm a shapeshifting unicorn.

If I don't dispute that, does it make it so?

Yeah i call bs on that one. If you are already a unicorn then there is no reason to shapeshift into anything ever again. Unicorns are magical.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: RomeByFire

Facts, logic and reason are all subjugated to emotional identity politics.

Reality is fake news if it shows you something you wish wasn't true.

I think you got that backwards. Since when are we supposed to take phonecalls and readings of documents wthout providing said documents as face value?

The Podesta emails, for starters.

I can't stand the woman but Hillary witch hunts also fit the profile.

Staged mass casualty events orchestrated by the government for gun control? Fits the criteria.

"The buck stops at Trump."

CLEARLY not.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

Take heart, ATS is disproportionately pro-Trump and lot of the Trump supporters here aren't even American.

I do take heart, but some things I cant seem to let go of, like the inane belief that most ATS members would be able to separate in their minds the difference between not liking what is happening in Government with supporting a moron because they don't like what is happening in Government.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: essentialtremors

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: alphabetaone

All of you who are absolutely sure that everything reported from a document no one sees but is simply read over the phone to the press is perfectly legit.

Two different Officials read the same quotes to the NYTs.

Sean Spicer did not dispute what was read to him by the NYTs.

No doubt you guys desperately WANT this to not be accurate...

But it is.

Two complete strangers can tell you that I'm a shapeshifting unicorn.

If I don't dispute that, does it make it so?

Yeah i call bs on that one. If you are already a unicorn then there is no reason to shapeshift into anything ever again. Unicorns are magical.

The post you're replying to is the classical case of burden of proof and where it lies.

That poster believes the burden of proof is on those disputing the claims, not making them.

This is called a logical fallacy. Let's not feed into the ignorant trolls.

a reply to: alphabetaone

I just wanted to see what it was about...And if it was the usual sources say...Blah blah. What I found was if you read the article Spicer had a pretty good explanation of the actions...And that you had conveniently left that out. If someone does get some actual evidence of Trump breaking the law or some serious wrongdoings I am all for taking him to task on it though...Until then I'll just wait and point out the absurdity.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: alphabetaone

I just wanted to see what it was about...And if it was the usual sources say...Blah blah. What I found was if you read the article Spicer had a pretty good explanation of the actions...And that you had conveniently left that out. If someone does get some actual evidence of Trump breaking the law or some serious wrongdoings I am all for taking him to task on it though...Until then I'll just wait and point out the absurdity.

I didn't conveniently leave a thing out. Is that the new mantra at ATS?? To quote the ENTIRE article? No, people can read.

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: RomeByFire

Facts, logic and reason are all subjugated to emotional identity politics.

Reality is fake news if it shows you something you wish wasn't true.

I think you got that backwards. Since when are we supposed to take phonecalls and readings of documents wthout providing said documents as face value?

The Podesta emails, for starters.

I can't stand the woman but Hillary witch hunts also fit the profile.

Staged mass casualty events orchestrated by the government for gun control? Fits the criteria.

"The buck stops at Trump."

CLEARLY not.

I read the podesta emails and they exist. We are still waiting for the Comey memo and all the media is doing is stalling. Isnt that highly suspicious to you?

a reply to: Indigo5

Do we deny the reports?

I don't see anyone denying the reports. They're printed plain as day.

But I want to actually see the memos, not what someone says someone else told them about them over the phone.

Pssst, someone called me at work today and read me part of a diary that Indigo5's old pal wrote about a time they went to a bar. Apparently Indigo5 couldn't pay the tab. So I conclude that this means Indigo5 may be in financial trouble and could be compromised financially.

Oh, you want to see that diary? I'm sorry. My source only read part of that diary entry to me over the phone and I wasn't allowed to verify it with my own eyes.

See?

a reply to: RickyD

And that you had conveniently left that out.

Notice how that happens a lot when it come to these types of stories.

originally posted by: FuggleHop
a reply to: alphabetaone

So what? Its not a crime to end and investigation.

Yes it is in fact it's an impeachable offense.

a reply to: alphabetaone

No but I'd say his response was a pretty important part of the article though and would have made a much more complete picture of the exchange than quoting the part that fit the view point you wanted to push in this thread. It's like when you write a paper trying to convince an audience of an argument it's generally accepted practice to also include the arguments against your point of view then refute them. By not doing so you appear bias and why should anyone trust that?

a reply to: buster2010

“By grandstanding and politicizing the investigation into Russia’s actions, James Comey created unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate with Russia,” Spicer said in a  statement to the press. “The investigation would have always continued, and obviously, the termination of Comey would not have ended it. Once again, the real story is that our national security has been undermined by the leaking of private and highly classified conversations.”

In case you missed it from the article...

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
Let's say it is true, so what? Comey is an Obama-appointment and Clinton-supporter (Comey got rich off the Clinton Foundation), Trump should have fired him Day 1. Trump tried to play nice, and it backfired on him, so he rectified the situation by firing the shill. Big deal.

The big deal is you don't let a hostile government's belief in your strength wane in the face of calling your duly authorized officials responsible for the Code of Law 'nut jobs'. That's the big deal. It has nothing to do with anything you've said.

Not sure if Comey is a nut job or not but he is a spineless piece of sh*t that has an empty scrotum for letting Hillary off the email server hook.
He could have taken all of them down, Obama included but nooooooooo.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: alphabetaone

I just wanted to see what it was about...And if it was the usual sources say...Blah blah. What I found was if you read the article Spicer had a pretty good explanation of the actions...And that you had conveniently left that out. If someone does get some actual evidence of Trump breaking the law or some serious wrongdoings I am all for taking him to task on it though...Until then I'll just wait and point out the absurdity.

I didn't conveniently leave a thing out. Is that the new mantra at ATS?? To quote the ENTIRE article? No, people can read.

Sure you did, especially when you said this

This is the official account, that even Sean Spicer decided not to dispute.

At least show what he said.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: essentialtremors

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: alphabetaone

All of you who are absolutely sure that everything reported from a document no one sees but is simply read over the phone to the press is perfectly legit.

Two different Officials read the same quotes to the NYTs.

Sean Spicer did not dispute what was read to him by the NYTs.

No doubt you guys desperately WANT this to not be accurate...

But it is.

Two complete strangers can tell you that I'm a shapeshifting unicorn.

If I don't dispute that, does it make it so?

Yeah i call bs on that one. If you are already a unicorn then there is no reason to shapeshift into anything ever again. Unicorns are magical.

I have the documents to prove it.

You'll just have to verify them via phone

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: FuggleHop
a reply to: alphabetaone

So what? Its not a crime to end and investigation.

Yes it is in fact it's an impeachable offense.

Wait even when the investigation yielded zero results so far and looks like a endless money pit? The US had hearings like crazy and not one government official presented any evidence since day one.

originally posted by: Perfectenemy

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: FuggleHop
a reply to: alphabetaone

So what? Its not a crime to end and investigation.

Yes it is in fact it's an impeachable offense.

Wait even when the investigation yielded zero results so far and looks like a endless money pit? The US had hearings like crazy and not one government official presented any evidence since day one.

He gets his info from Maxine Waters.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
Let's say it is true, so what? Comey is an Obama-appointment and Clinton-supporter (Comey got rich off the Clinton Foundation), Trump should have fired him Day 1. Trump tried to play nice, and it backfired on him, so he rectified the situation by firing the shill. Big deal.

The big deal is you don't let a hostile government's belief in your strength wane in the face of calling your duly authorized officials responsible for the Code of Law 'nut jobs'. That's the big deal. It has nothing to do with anything you've said.

But everyone calls Trump a nut job. So how does that square now with your outrage over this?

some are saying jared Kushner is the leaker...