Reactions to Trumps NYT interview show why ensuring Russia investigation not political is crucial

So Trump gave an interview to the new york times, and the MSM is not very happy about it.

www.washingtonpost.com... f55fa896e1c2

www.cnbc.com...

www.cnn.com...

www.vanityfair.com...

nymag.com...

One of the biggest criticism of trump in the interview is that he said he could do whatever he wants with the Justice department.

Read Trump’s phrasing carefully: “I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department.” It’s a statement that speaks both to Trump’s yearning for authoritarian power and his misunderstanding of the system in which he actually operates.

www.vox.com...

This has also been discussed here on ATS.

Now leaving aside the the irony that all of these people are worked up about trump SAYING he can use the justice department how he wants, when they had no problem with Obama DOING this in the DOJ, IRS, EPA, FBI, and who knows how many other agencies, there is another interesting matter thaat this brings up.

Many of the same people oin ATS or in the media complaining about Trumps comments here are the exact same people that say Trump criticizing the FBI or mueller investigation is dangerous to the country, and that if Trump has nothing to hide, it doesnt matter what biases or shadiness occured in the FBI or doj.

Well isnt this funny!

So I say to all of those worried about trumps words here;

What are you worried the dems are hiding? Who cares if Trump runs the FBI or DOJ as a political tool. If dems have nothing to hide, then they shouldnt fear trump using these branches in an ever widening search against the democrats for criminality.

The funny things myself and others have repeatedly said to anti trump people, you will see how this excusing for the politicization of the DOJ and FBI is a bad thing when its used against your party. And people laughed an brushed it off.

Now we have Trump not even doing that but just saying words, and sure enough those very same people are screaming how corrupt it is.

Perhaps now these people should take time to reflect on how if they are worried about how Trump may weaponize the FBI or doj, that it is very troubling that Obama may have actually done just that, and worth making sure the investigation into trumps team wasnt politically motivated.

a reply to: Grambler

Waytogo, bring every MSM news site here, I bet this rises to the top of the page.

ATS = MSM.

Thanks minion.

a reply to: Grambler

So what your saying is that you were screaming about how bad it was when Obama supposedly did what now you are willing to excuse Trump of doing? Am I getting that right?

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: Grambler

So what your saying is that you were screaming about how bad it was when Obama supposedly did what now you are now willing to excuse Trump of doing? Am I getting that right?

No quite the opposite.

If we find out trump is doing things like using opposition research he paid for from Kremlin sources as an excuse to launch never ending investigations into Democrats, I will be right their with the democrats calling out this disgusting behavior.

Its wasnt good under Obama, nor would it be good under Trump.

originally posted by: Grambler
...when they had no problem with Obama DOING this in the DOJ, IRS, EPA, FBI, and who knows how many other agencies...

Sadly it's an all too familiar sight, Obama, Nixon and others have used various agencies to go after political enemies and in many cases, regular citizens. It's an unfair request to the people tasked to perform this political hatchet work and criminal to those it is inflicted upon.

a reply to: Grambler

Good to hear. My next question is are you willing to accept Muller's findings? Either way, I'm fine with it. I hope they find nothing, and I have NO love loss for this President.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: Grambler

Good to hear. My next question is are you willing to accept Muller's findings? Either way, I'm fine with it. I hope they find nothing, and I have NO love loss for this President.

Well that kind of gets to the heart of this OP.

If Mueller shows actual physical evidence of a crime, then yes, despite any bias, I will accept that. For example, in the case of Manafort, it seems they have actual physical bank accounts emails and other things that prove his guilt on the financial and failing to register as a foriegn lobbyist charges.

But on things like process charges like lying to the FBI and others, i will have to see excatly how it played out. For example, we know strzok interviewed Flynn, and as a result Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI.

But strzok also interviewed Huma and Cheryl Mills, and we know that they did lie to him about knowledge into hillarys server, as has been proven from their emails. Yet they werent charged.

Lets say ueller comes out and says here is proof that Trump was working with russians to steal the election, buut I dont think he had INTENT, so I am not charging him.

No I would not accept that and would want trump charged.

So if I had to guess, I would say there is a 95% chance I will accept Muellers findings, the 5% being if something shady comes up.

-Chris

a reply to: MiddleInsite

No he's obviously stating there is a difference between words and action, but for some reason certain people are more offended by spoken word than actually performing that said action. He's also coupling the fact that some state it doesn't matter how far the mueller investigation goes because they won't find anything if nothing was done, so those people shouldn't be concerned if Trump takes the same route with investigative bodies.

a reply to: Christosterone

I never get tired of these videos.

They make me feel all warm and happy inside.

I’m always moving. I’m moving in both directions. We have to get rid of chainlike immigration, we have to get rid of the chain. The chain is the last guy that killed. … [Talking with guests.] … The last guy that killed the eight people. … [Inaudible.] … So badly wounded people. … Twenty-two people came in through chain migration. Chain migration and the lottery system. They have a lottery in these countries. They take the worst people in the country, they put ‘em into the lottery, then they have a handful of bad, worse ones, and they put them out. ‘Oh, these are the people the United States. …” … We’re gonna get rid of the lottery, and by the way, the Democrats agree with me on that. On chain migration, they pretty much agree with me.


god, he's a rambling idiot.

a reply to: Grambler

I could care less about the fact that Trump thinks he can do whatever he wants with the DOJ. I’m confident there’s enough checks and balances in place to prevent him from going rogue.

My problem with the responses he gave during the interview is that they are, by and large, a collection of incoherent gibberish. Donald Trump is one of few politicians who possess the ability to make Sarah Palin’s tossed word salads look intelligent.

The man can’t maintain a thought long enough to put together a complete sentence, much less make a sensible statement. And according to him, he knows a lot of words. It’s a shame he doesn’t know what to do with all those words.

Not to long ago, John Oliver addressed this very issue and I think they determined that an iPhone’s preemptive text would be more coherent than the POTUS we currently have. You can watch the video here;

www.theguardian.com...

I’m not talking about John Oliver when I say, “What an inarticulate dunce!”

And to think that he “speaks” for me is both sickening and embarrassing.

a reply to: Flatfish

I guess you prefer you comments precanned like Obama.

Cause Obama sounded SOOOOO GOOOOOD when he went of prompter.

(ignore the onion bit)



I am less concerned about president sounding bad than what they actually do.

a reply to: Grambler

Oh I agree, everyone at one time or another gets tongue tied or looses their train of thought.

The BIG difference between these two examples is that Obama recognizes the fact that he’s mumbling and not making sense, while Trump thinks he just made perfect sense, maybe better sense than anyone has every made and.......anyone who disagrees with that assessment is just propagating fake news.

Am I right?

The man is a delusional, inarticulate, dunce and yup, that bothers me just a little bit.

a reply to: Flatfish

Right trumps stumbles and words are most important to you.

Again, I prefer to judge on actions more than stumbling words.

a reply to: Grambler

The problem that I see is not that Trump has certain powers in regards to the DoJ. He is president after all. The problem is the mindset he has to say what he said.

Considering that he has openly said he would go after his political opponents and knowing that his supporters would back him no matter what he does, it does not leave one very confident in his ability to do what is just and right with the powers he has been given, or that his supporters would hold his feet to the fire if he overstepped boundaries we consider reasonable.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Flatfish

Right trumps stumbles and words are most important to you.

Again, I prefer to judge on actions more than stumbling words.

Well excuse the hell out of me!

And here I thought the subject of this thread was about the left’s reaction to Trump’s responses, (words) that he gave in a recent interview and possible bias in the investigation.

My bad.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

The problem that I see is not that Trump has certain powers in regards to the DoJ. He is president after all. The problem is the mindset he has to say what he said.

Considering that he has openly said he would go after his political opponents and knowing that his supporters would back him no matter what he does, it does not leave one very confident in his ability to do what is just and right with the powers he has been given, or that his supporters would hold his feet to the fire if he overstepped boundaries we consider reasonable.

So you are saying when the doj or fbi is going after political figures, it's important to make sure they are not acting out of political favortism?

I agree!

Shame that so many anti trump people don't agree.

originally posted by: knoxie
I’m always moving. I’m moving in both directions. We have to get rid of chainlike immigration, we have to get rid of the chain. The chain is the last guy that killed. … [Talking with guests.] … The last guy that killed the eight people. … [Inaudible.] … So badly wounded people. … Twenty-two people came in through chain migration. Chain migration and the lottery system. They have a lottery in these countries. They take the worst people in the country, they put ‘em into the lottery, then they have a handful of bad, worse ones, and they put them out. ‘Oh, these are the people the United States. …” … We’re gonna get rid of the lottery, and by the way, the Democrats agree with me on that. On chain migration, they pretty much agree with me.


god, he's a rambling idiot.

You can say that again! Which is why I quoted it in my response.

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Flatfish

Right trumps stumbles and words are most important to you.

Again, I prefer to judge on actions more than stumbling words.

Well excuse the hell out of me!

And here I thought the subject of this thread was about the left’s reaction to Trump’s responses, (words) that he gave in a recent interview and possible bias in the investigation.

My bad.

You can discuss anything you like.

I can comment on it.

My point in this thread is that peoples reaction to this interview on the parts where trump said he could do what he wants with the DOJ proves that having a politicized DOJ, FBI etc is a very bad thing.

So it is hypocritical when those same people admonish anyone calling out the politicization of the current russia investigation.

But feel free to comment in any way you like.

You think trump being a bad speaker in your opinion is the real story.

Thats fine, I just disagree.