White House wanted USS John S. McCain covered up during Trump’s Japan visit

Donald J. Trump ☑
‏
Verified account

@realDonaldTrump

The Navy put out a disclaimer on the McCain story. Looks like the story was an exaggeration, or even Fake News - but why not, everything else is!

5:23 PM - 30 May 2019

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Be Prepared for this Sort of Thing EVEN there Fred..............Sorry ...(

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So the USN, itself, has debunked this thread as Fake News.


Isn't that enough to send this thread to the HOAX bin?


I would hate to think that on ATS, different standards apply to threads posted by Super Moderators.

Well, my post was removed for daring to say that during his visit at Georgetown, Obama in 2009 covered up not a mere human but covered up Jesus Christ and that the MSM was OK with this.

Jesus Christ is far more important than John McCain.

What I said/repeated just above is relevant to the discussion, is not trolling nor is it offensive.

Criticizing Obama is not offensive nor is it grounds to remove a post, particularly given the 1st Amendment.

Nor is it thread drift.

Two presidents, Obama and Trump covered up a historical figure and I am comparing how these two very similar Presidential actions were treated vastly differently by the MSM.

Media censors, grow some skin, and GROW UP - accept that most people view Zerobama for the shythead that he is.

originally posted by: Rewey

originally posted by: FredT

My father served int eh US Navy and I'm disgusted beyond belief

So, let's see if this works... Now that this has been conclusively proven to be complete BS, are you 'disgusted beyond belief' that:

- MSM would lie about something?

- MSM would besmirch the name and reputation of your President?

- So many lefties would star your OP in support of such claims which were so obviously nonsense?

Just curious...

I thought I'd follow up with my question from a few pages ago...

Well, FredT? Are you equally disgusted beyond belief by the things I mention, now that you realise the truth of the story?

Or are you just turning your back on this thread and walking away?

a reply to: FredT

Can we just rename it the USS R

Gotta love these human concepts that make us upset over things not worth getting upset over.

Any wonder this species is stagnating.

Oh noes I cannot see a boat!

Quick kill somebody!

Seriously some people get upset over stupid # like I would get upset over having my wife killed before I and my dog get raped.

I've really lost hope for humanity when this is the kind of # that keeps the majority up at night.

This is so much worse than Obama bowing to foreign leaders or going on an endless apology tour for how evil America is. Then again, we can't point that out because it is racist..

originally posted by: Rewey
I thought I'd follow up with my question from a few pages ago...

Well, FredT? Are you equally disgusted beyond belief by the things I mention, now that you realise the truth of the story?

Or are you just turning your back on this thread and walking away?

Hardly............ You guys can strawman all you want. Screaming Fake News is not exactly gold standard rebuttal no? It is perhaps how things are done these days but its hardly an effective way to defend or pick holes in a position

Reality:

Trump basically claimed he has no knowledge but someone does and his tweet shows it.

Trump told reporters on Thursday morning it was done by someone who was "well meaning."
www.usatoday.com...

The denials state that the ship was not obscured during the visit (true) but have yet to deny the WH requested it. Since its fake news why an investigation?

"Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan announced that he asked his chief of staff to investigate what was behind obscuring the name of the USS John McCain during President Donald Trump's visit to Japan." www.usatoday.com...

Even the Pentagon says the request was made:

A spokesperson for the Pentagon said early Thursday morning that acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan had not been aware that the White House asked the U.S. Navy to make sure the USS John S. McCain was “out of sight” for President Trump’s visit to Japan.

"Secretary Shanahan was not aware of the directive to move the USS John S McCain nor was he aware of the concern precipitating the directive,” Lt. Colonel Joe Buccino said in a statement.
thehill.com...

Which contradicts some of the WSJ story BUT not the fact that someone wanted to cover things up. But again there was a directive

originally posted by: FredT
Since its fake news why an investigation?

You ask that after months and millions of dollars were wasted investigating the fake Russian Collusion narrative which was based on a fake dossier to obtain an unlawful FISA warrant? Really? That's a hill you're willing to charge up right now?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Fake? Hardly. and it keeps trickling on in
Transcript released of Flynn voicemail from Trump lawyer showing possible attempt to obstruct

But I digress

Back to the topic:

Someone (who is yet to be determined as everybody has been quick to tweet the standard "Not Me" ) wanted to prevent the Toddler in Chief from wigging out over a ship named after not one, not two, but 3 US servicemen who apparently were okay from a podiatry standpoint to serve in the military.

The story broke not at MSNBC or CNN which will make some of you apoplectic at the mere mention, but rather the conservative leaning WSJ

Aside from pointing out that the stern was not covered (which almost everybody is agreement), Trump himself has acknowledged that whoever did it at the white house was "well meaning" at the request of the WH, someone tried to have the ship moved or covered up.

a reply to: FredT

Did you read that entire story?

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Fake? Hardly. and it keeps trickling on in
Transcript released of Flynn voicemail from Trump lawyer showing possible attempt to obstruct

Is an "attempt to obstruct" codeword for "Russian Collusion?" The initial investigation was based on a goddamned hoax, a politically motivated hoax spearheaded by toddlers in Congress and the infantile voters who were unable to accept the simple fact that they lost a presidential election.

It honestly looks like some manner of Orwelian doublespeak has infested your logical pathways, my friend. You're calling false information the gospel, will our next wars be considered manifestations of peace by you? Are your shackles accoutrements of freedom? Looking forward to the end of the day when you can let your hair up around your shoulders and prop your feet down in the air above your ottoman?

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: FredT

Did you read that entire story?

LMAO, looks like I can add "exposing all private communications one's lawyer has had" is now "attorney/client privilege" to the above list of Backwards Bill's backwards life on a backwards hill.

Honestly Burd, "exposing all private communications one's lawyer has had" It was lawyer to lawyer not Trump to his attorney and to be fair I am not a lawyer, but I'm not sure if that type of communication over the phone in that manner would preserve privilege. I would love to hear from a lawyer to see if that is the case.

However, it is pretty clear as ruled in that "“[T]he ‘seal of secrecy,’ ... between lawyer and client does not extend to communications ‘made for the purpose of getting advice for the commission of a fraud’ or crime" Id. at 563, 109 S.Ct. 2619 would waive privilege.

We recently finished a acrimonious and protracted labor negotiations with our hospital and got a hour long lecture from our attorney about how to lose privilege.

As I said, its trickling wonder what the non redacted free of Barr interpretation one looks like but again, looks like we have moved on from the sad case of the USS John McCain no?

originally posted by: FredT
looks like we have moved on from the sad case of the USS John McCain no?

If only we could move on from the sad life of US Senator John S McCain, I'd be quite pleased. You're right, we've veered from the original topic.

Regarding that, I think it's fairly obvious that a certain percentage of active military members absolutely do not like or respect John McCain... I think it also obvious that a certain percentage of active duty military members voted for and fully support Donald Trump. Knowing the beef the two had between them, knowing the fact that Trump could even be considered "popular" among the military, it doesn't require any gyrations to consider the possibility of a couple of sailors deciding to cover the ship's name up on their own and the upper brass taking the path of least resistance and throwing spitballs at multiple excuses/targets to muddy the waters and avoid having to go through the arduous process of trying to figure out what squids did what.

I jumped into this topic for one primary reason, though... your initial statement was wrong. A LOT of Americans despise John McCain. A LOT of Republicans despise John McCain. He was always an extremely polarizing figure in the GOP. When he ran for POTUS, it was a sacrificial nomination from a party which figured GWB had deep sixed their chance of retaining the White House and opted to run someone who was clearly not going to win through the process instead of wasting a potential 2012 candidate with a chance. So your sentiment trying to tie the disgust in seeing a US Ship honoring the man to purely Trump sycophantism was sorely misplaced. Trump fell into the middle of a seething hatred of McCain that was long burning before he ever declared himself in the race.

a reply to: FredT

I'm retired Navy and believe me, McCain was a nasty and lazy bastard in the Navy. Not to mention some other things.

originally posted by: ServiusTull
a reply to: FredT

I'm retired Navy and believe me, McCain was a nasty and lazy bastard in the Navy. Not to mention some other things.

thanks for your service
there are a lot of people that know the truth about that crapbag

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Fake? Hardly. and it keeps trickling on in
Transcript released of Flynn voicemail from Trump lawyer showing possible attempt to obstruct

But I digress

Back to the topic:

Someone (who is yet to be determined as everybody has been quick to tweet the standard "Not Me" ) wanted to prevent the Toddler in Chief from wigging out over a ship named after not one, not two, but 3 US servicemen who apparently were okay from a podiatry standpoint to serve in the military.

The story broke not at MSNBC or CNN which will make some of you apoplectic at the mere mention, but rather the conservative leaning WSJ

Aside from pointing out that the stern was not covered (which almost everybody is agreement), Trump himself has acknowledged that whoever did it at the white house was "well meaning" at the request of the WH, someone tried to have the ship moved or covered up.

Ugh, O.M.G. you feel for fake news again.
I bowed in hopes you'll come to terma, but no and since then, you doubled down and quite literally falling FOR MORE FAKE NEWS.

Source:

www.thegatewaypundit.com...

Source aside, the biggest take away of course is this...

"Conservative Treehouse later explained: Notice how Mueller leaves out (via edits) the context of the call, and the important qualifier: “without you having to give up any confidential information.” Clearly Dowd does not want to interfere in Flynn’s cooperation with the special counsel, which is opposite to the twisted claim presented by Weissmann and Mueller’s report." Et al.

The transcript is but one instance of POSSIBLE OBSTRUCTION but determined by AG and DOJ that it wasn't, it didn't meet the standards.

But this is offtopic, however it bares mentioning that if your going to litter even more fake news, at least make some sort of disclaimer as oppose to, "Well here is this, but thats offopic", like come on, really?

I bowed out, but in light of fake news, I'm compelled to respond because my integrity alarms are blaring.