Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation

[risky biz]

Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html?_r=0

Look who the trash element on this newsgroup voted to make President of the United States. A worthless P.O.S. who pressured the FBI Director to abandon any ethics he had and not investigate crimes of the highest nature that strike at the very heart of our system of government.

[Travel]

Debunked. And it was Comey who debunked it (chortle).

[Dutch]

Voice from the fact-free zone.

[VegasJerry]

There it is again, "NANANANANANANAN DEBUNKED!"

Then SHOW US. SHOW US. SHOW US.

Jerry LOLing @ u

[FL Turbo]

Travel is 100% correct.
Comey has already testified that there was no interference.
He had already testified that there was no attempt to interfere.

In fact, had there been, he was duty bound to report it to the AG
immediately if it had happened.
He could be criminally prosecuted if he didn't do that.
Ergo, no attempt was made to stop the investigation.

Dutch, you gotta get your brain out of the deranged fever swamp that
is the Democrat party.
It is severely impacting your judgment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go
away,” Philip K. Dick said, when asked to define what reality is.

[Dutch]

FL Turbo wrote:
> On Fri, 19 May 2017 16:30:00 -0700, Dutch <n...@email.com> wrote:
>
>> Travel wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 10:06:03 AM UTC-4, risky biz wrote:
>>>> Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation
>>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/us/politics/james-comey-trump-flynn-russia-investigation.html?_r=0
>>>>
>>>> Look who the trash element on this newsgroup voted to make President of the United States. A worthless P.O.S. who pressured the FBI Director to abandon any ethics he had and not investigate crimes of the highest nature that strike at the very heart of our system of government.
>>>
>>> Debunked. And it was Comey who debunked it (chortle).
>>>
>>
>> Voice from the fact-free zone.
> Travel is 100% correct.

An echo from the fact-free zone.

> Comey has already testified that there was no interference.
> He had already testified that there was no attempt to interfere.

Show the report of that testimony.

>
> In fact, had there been, he was duty bound to report it to the AG
> immediately if it had happened.
> He could be criminally prosecuted if he didn't do that.

The AG is recused from the Russia investigation and himself under
suspicion. Comey could not report it to Sessions.

> Ergo, no attempt was made to stop the investigation.

We shall see. The congressional committees will determine that. On the
face of it, it looks like Trump was trying to influence Comey. His own
words tell the story.

>
> Dutch, you gotta get your brain out of the deranged fever swamp that
> is the Democrat party.
> It is severely impacting your judgment.

I suppose you consider yourself to be objective <lolol>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go
> away,” Philip K. Dick said, when asked to define what reality is.

Like the evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia...

[BTSinAustin]

Comey testified under oath that no president asked him to end an investigation.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

BTSinAustin <btsin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...

>Comey testified under oath that no president asked him to end an investigation.

No, that never happened.

--bks

[Bea Foroni]

Actually, it did happened. On May 3rd Comey testified no one asked him to end the investigation. A lot of political double-speak, it was his testimony. They're all a bunch of lying liars. For what? A fucking job? I don't think I'm a saint, but I have acted with much better morals than these politicians- willing to sellout their mother and country for a few dollars? Disgusting. I think China has a better solution, summary execution; better behaved leaders than the sorry gang that infests our capitol.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Bea Foroni <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Actually, it did happened. On May 3rd Comey testified no one asked him
>to end the investigation.

> ...

No, No, No. On 3 May Comey said that no one *at DOJ* had

asked him to end the investigation.

--bks

[Bradley K. Sherman]

|
| President Trump asked two of the nation's top intelligence
| officials in March to help him push back against an FBI
| investigation into possible coordination between his
| campaign and the Russian government, according to current
| and former officials.
|
| Trump made separate appeals to the director of national
| intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers,
| the director of the National Security Agency, urging them
| to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion
| during the 2016 election.
| ...
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html>

--bks

Are we at Obstruction of Justice, yet?

[Bea Foroni]

I understand what you are saying. And I believe you are correct, but doing searches I get the same video snippet of Comey and the Rep. from Hawaii. I don't post videos, and I can't find the transcript for the few second exchange that has caused the right wing Trump supporters to write things like this;

Former FBI Director James Comey testified under Senate oath May 3rd that the Trump administration had not pressured his agency to halt any investigation for political purposes. Comey admitted that the FBI has always been free to operate without political interference—flying in the face of Democrats’ paranoid delusions about Russia and President Donald J. Trump, and exposing for what it is a new political witch hunt Wednesday by enemies within the president’s own Justice Department.
http://gotnews.com/breaking-fbi-director-james-comey-testified-oath-may-3rd-trump-administration-doesnt-obstruct-investigations/

[Clave]

"Bea Foroni" <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b3cae4a3-7def-4d13...@googlegroups.com...

You do know that's an alt-right shithole of a news source, right?

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Bea Foroni <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:48:46 PM UTC-7, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
>> Bea Foroni <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >Actually, it did happened. On May 3rd Comey testified no one asked him
>> >to end the investigation.
>> > ...
>>
>> No, No, No. On 3 May Comey said that no one *at DOJ* had
>> asked him to end the investigation.
>

>I understand what you are saying. And I believe you are correct, but
>doing searches I get the same video snippet of Comey and the Rep. from
>Hawaii. I don't post videos, and I can't find the transcript for the few
>second exchange that has caused the right wing Trump supporters to write
>things like this;

> ...

Here's the transcript:
<http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/03/wolf.02.html>

--bks

[Bea Foroni]

So here is the bit of transcript where Comey is answering Sen. Hirono,

COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.


That is the proof people like Travel and BS in Austin offer. "It not happened in my experience."

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Bea Foroni <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/03/wolf.02.html>

>
>So here is the bit of transcript where Comey is answering Sen. Hirono,
>
>COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the
>FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I
>mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case
>there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm
>talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a
>political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my
>experience.
>
>
>That is the proof people like Travel and BS in Austin offer. "It not
>happened in my experience."

Okay, but it ignores the question being asked:
|
| HIRONO: So if the Attorney General or senior officials at
| the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation,
| can they halt that FBI investigation?
|

No FBI investigation was "halted" *even if you include Trump
in "senior officials at DoJ"*.

--bks

[Bea Foroni]

Preaching to the choir. The reply I posted from Comey is what stands as evidence that Comey was not told to back off.

The nation is divided. Half uses facts and evidence. The other half (Objectivists/ libertarians) believes "one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive logic...".

It is like arguing evolution, one side uses conductive logic and the other uses inductive logic.

[Dutch]

Bradley K. Sherman wrote:

> No FBI investigation was "halted" *even if you include Trump
> in "senior officials at DoJ"*.
>
> --bks
>

The plot thickens

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.1567561beb83

[popinjay]

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:40:32 PM UTC-7, Bea Foroni wrote:



> I don't think I'm a saint,
>

Good, because you're not.

[VegasJerry]

Trump asked intelligence chiefs to push back against FBI collusion probe after Comey revealed its existence

By Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima

Washington Post |

President Trump asked two of the nation’s top intelligence officials in March to help him push back against an FBI investigation into possible coordination between his campaign and the Russian government, according to current and former officials.

Trump made separate appeals to the director of national intelligence, Daniel Coats, and to Adm. Michael S. Rogers, the director of the National Security Agency, urging them to publicly deny the existence of any evidence of collusion during the 2016 election.

Coats and Rogers refused to comply with the requests, which they both deemed to be inappropriate, according to two current and two former officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private communications with the president.

Trump sought the assistance of Coats and Rogers after FBI Director James B. Comey told the House Intelligence Committee on March 20 that the FBI was investigating “the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.”

Trump’s conversation with Rogers was documented contemporaneously in an internal memo written by a senior NSA official, according to the officials. It is unclear if a similar memo was prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to document Trump’s conversation with Coats. Officials said such memos could be made available to both the special counsel now overseeing the Russia investigation and congressional investigators, who might explore whether Trump sought to impede the FBI’s work.

White House officials say Comey’s testimony about the scope of the FBI investigation upset Trump, who has dismissed the FBI and congressional investigations as a “witch hunt.” The president has repeatedly said there was no collusion.

Current and former senior intelligence officials viewed Trump’s requests as an attempt by the president to tarnish the credibility of the agency leading the Russia investigation.

A senior intelligence official said Trump’s goal was to “muddy the waters” about the scope of the FBI probe at a time when Democrats were ramping up their calls for the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel, a step announced last week.

Senior intelligence officials also saw the March requests as a threat to the independence of U.S. spy agencies, which are supposed to remain insulated from partisan issues.

“The problem wasn’t so much asking them to issue statements, it was asking them to issue false statements about an ongoing investigation,” a former senior intelligence official said of the request to Coats.

The NSA and Brian Hale, a spokesman for Coats, declined to comment, citing the ongoing investigation.

“The White House does not confirm or deny unsubstantiated claims based on illegal leaks from anonymous individuals,” a White House spokesman said. “The president will continue to focus on his agenda that he was elected to pursue by the American people.”

In addition to the requests to Coats and Rogers, senior White House officials sounded out top intelligence officials about the possibility of intervening directly with Comey to encourage the FBI to drop its probe of Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, according to people familiar with the matter. The officials said the White House appeared uncertain about its power to influence the FBI.

“Can we ask him to shut down the investigation? Are you able to assist in this matter?” one official said of the line of questioning from the White House.

Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said the report is “yet another disturbing allegation that the President was interfering in the FBI probe.” Schiff said in a statement that Congress “will need to bring the relevant officials back to testify on these matters, and obtain any memoranda that reflect such conversations.”

The new revelations add to a growing body of evidence that Trump sought to co-opt and then undermine Comey before he fired him May 9. According to notes kept by Comey, Trump first asked for his loyalty at a dinner in January and then, at a meeting the next month, asked him to drop the probe into Flynn. Trump disputes those accounts.

Current and former officials said that Trump either lacks an understanding of the FBI’s role as an independent law enforcement agency or does not care about maintaining such boundaries.

Trump’s effort to use the director of national intelligence and the NSA director to dispute Comey’s statement and to say there was no evidence of collusion echoes President Richard Nixon’s “unsuccessful efforts to use the CIA to shut down the FBI’s investigation of the Watergate break-in on national security grounds,” said Jeffrey H. Smith, a former general counsel at the CIA. Smith called Trump’s actions “an appalling abuse of power.”

Trump made his appeal to Coats days after Comey’s testimony, according to officials.

That same week, Trump telephoned Rogers to make a similar appeal.

In his call with Rogers, Trump urged the NSA director to speak out publicly if there was no evidence of collusion, according to officials briefed on the exchange.

Rogers was taken aback but tried to respectfully explain why he could not do so, the officials said. For one thing, he could not comment on an ongoing investigation. Rogers added that he would not talk about classified matters in public.

While relations between Trump and Comey were strained by the Russia probe, ties between the president and the other intelligence chiefs, including Rogers, Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo, appear to be less contentious, according to officials.

Rogers met with Trump in New York shortly after the election, and Trump’s advisers at the time held him out as the leading candidate to be the next director of national intelligence.

The Washington Post subsequently reported that President Barack Obama’s defense secretary and director of national intelligence had recommended that Rogers be removed as head of the NSA.

Ultimately, Trump decided to nominate Coats, rather than Rogers. Coats was sworn in just days before the president made his request.

In February, the Trump White House also sought to enlist senior members of the intelligence community and Congress to push back against suggestions that Trump associates were in frequent contact with Russian officials. But in that case, the White House effort was designed to refute news accounts, not the testimony of a sitting FBI director who was leading an open investigation.

Trump and his allies in Congress have similarly sought to deflect scrutiny over Russia by attempting to pit U.S. intelligence agencies against one another.

In December, Trump’s congressional allies falsely claimed that the FBI did not concur with a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Trump win the White House. Comey and then-CIA Director John Brennan later said that the bureau and the agency were in full agreement on Moscow’s intentions.

As the director of national intelligence, Coats leads the vast U.S. intelligence community, which includes the FBI. But that does not mean he has full visibility into the FBI probe. Coats’s predecessor in the job, James R. Clapper Jr., recently acknowledged that Comey did not brief him on the scope of the Russia investigation. Similarly, it is unclear to what extent the FBI has brought Coats up to speed on the probe’s most sensitive findings.

© 1996-2017 The Washington Post

[Tim Norfolk]

Half of the nation uses facts and evidence? That looks to be a great overestimate.

[fffurken]

On Tuesday, 23 May 2017 16:22:40 UTC+1, Tim Norfolk wrote:

> Half of the nation uses facts and evidence

Better than whataboutery, false equivalence and white guilt. Things you excel at. You also STILL cannot comprehend that the Troubles was not a religious conflict. Facts and evidence be damned, or maybe you're just thick.

[risky biz]

The lie factory is just twisting Comey's statement to mean something it wasn't intended to. They can't defend their reprehensible 'president' without lying.

The bottom line is that Comey took a note when Trump pressured him to drop the Flynn investigation. Flynn appears to be the nexus of the collusion with a foreign state to throw an American election.

[Travel]

It seems many are the baboons who don't understand that these various officials all work for the president and he can say whatever he feels like saying to them.

If Comey was investigating the BFP and Trump said to him: "why don't you drop this dog, it's going nowhere and we're wasting our FBI resources on it." Trump could say that, and you baboons would be jumping up and down with agreement.

You're not even "morally right" in saying. "But Comey was fired while investigating a possible Russian attempt in influencing Trump's election." So what.

Try to understand that Trump's the President with the highest security clearance, and in fact, it's Trump who classifies and declassifies information, etc.

You seem to think that whatever you don't like about Trump's activities in administering his own Executive branch of government, is obstruction of justice. That he's just there for you to bring down on how silly you interprets everything he says to his subordinates.

Obstruction of justice is hard to prove. Of a president, almost impossible.

A President can actually do and say whatever the fuck he wants.

He should fire Rosenstein, immediately, for example.

This nonsense about: "Trump can't do that!", etc. Uh, yes he can, presidents create precedent all the time. They're the highest authority who can say that you can do it. Trump can scrap the EPA and he can fire Comey regardless of how you think the "timing" of it "looks."

The problem with you baboons is that all the news is one-sided, and you don't see the reality of the matter: you'll find that, when the smoke clears, there really isn't anything these commies can do about what they don't like about Trump.

Watergate, "your great white hope."

Nixon, didn't even have to leave, he just did. The Republican senators would have never voted to convict in an impeachment trial. And now, you can't even get as far as impeachment with a Republican majority. Your chances of bringing down Trump are zero.

Investigations? After a year, we're still waiting for a crime, there is none. As I've posted before, Bush Jr had non-stop congressional investigations for his entire 8 years as President. The only difference now is the massive media attention to these joke investigations; there is no more substance to what's going on now and what was going on with investigations against Jr.

Remember, just because Rachel Maddow thinks something's wrong, it doesn't that it is.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Travel <trave...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...

>A President can actually do and say whatever the fuck he wants.

> ...

No.

--bks

[Dutch]

Travel wrote:
> It seems many are the baboons who don't understand that these various officials all work for the president and he can say whatever he feels like saying to them.
>

Have you ever heard of this little thing called "The US Constitution"?

You should check it out, it's quite interesting.

[Dutch]

Travel is confused, he's thinking of a dictator. Donald doesn't know the
difference either.

[popinjay]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:19:38 PM UTC-7, Dutch wrote:



>
> Have you ever heard of this little thing called "The US Constitution"?
>

Have YOU?

[popinjay]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:21:53 PM UTC-7, Dutch wrote:



>
> Travel is confused, he's thinking of a dictator. Donald doesn't know the
> difference either.

This is useless drivel. No wonder no one takes you seriously.

[Clave]

"Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:og2suo$fdm$1...@reader1.panix.com...

Anyone can say or do whatever the fuck they want, until someone or something
stops them.

There are consequences though, even for a President.

Granted, DOJ is not going to criminally indict a sitting President for
Constitutional reasons. However, Presidents can face criminal charges after
they leave office, even for actions taken prior to taking office AND while
in office.

If that were not true, there would have been no reason for a certain
cowardly GOP bag man to pardon a certain treasonous war criminal as one of
his first acts as President.

[Dutch]

popinjay wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:21:53 PM UTC-7, Dutch wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> Travel is confused, he's thinking of a dictator. Donald doesn't know the
>> difference either.
>
>
>
> This is useless drivel.

Talk about useless, if this was a Democratic president you'd be calling
for her head in a noose.

The Donald has gone to the heads of the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI trying
to get them to drop an ongoing investigation into his own campaign team,
and potentially him. That is completely inappropriate and probably illegal.

Travel needs to be schooled on separation of powers and limitations of
the branches of your government. The president is not above the law.

[popinjay]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:41:32 PM UTC-7, Dutch wrote:



>
> Travel needs to be schooled on separation of powers and limitations of
> the branches of your government. The president is not above the law.

And who is supposed to "school" him? YOU? You're not even in the same universe as Travel is. He is light years beyond you in civics and much more. In other words, you could not shine Travel's shoes, on your best day.

[Dutch]

popinjay wrote:
>
> And who is supposed to "school" him? YOU?

There are plenty of good people to do it, including but not limited to
the FBI and the committees of congress.. Stay tuned.

[VegasJerry]

On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 7:50:02 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:
> It seems many are the baboons who don't understand that these various officials all work
> for the president and he can say whatever he feels like saying to them.

It appears you’re “the baboon who doesn’t understand” because they don’t.

> it's Trump who classifies and declassifies information, etc.

Wrong.

> A President can actually do and say whatever the fuck he wants.

Wrong.

YOU are an embarrassed baboon. Too embarrassed to admit you’re wrong.
Thanks for the laugh…


Jerry

[Travel]

Lol, everyone's seen your idea of the Constitution. It's basically: anything you don't like is unconstitutional. The last thing that you would want to mention is the Constitution. It grants enormous powers to the President, and at the same time restricts the government:right Trump can't establish a national religion, but he can send s missile up your ass as you sit right there in your igloo in Canada, anytime he wants to and without asking anyone if it's okay.

He definitely doesn't have to "watch his words" at a meeting with his employee, that fucking Comey.

[Travel]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 9:12:57 AM UTC-4, VegasJerry wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 7:50:02 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:
> > It seems many are the baboons who don't understand that these various officials all work
> > for the president and he can say whatever he feels like saying to them.
>
> It appears you’re “the baboon who doesn’t understand” because they don’t.

Oh yes, dumbass, it's absolutely the case.

>
> > it's Trump who classifies and declassifies information, etc.
>
> Wrong.
>

No, you're wrong. Funny that you should tee yourself up like that. Pat Buchanan wrote this column after I made my post on the subject. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_pat_buchanan/a_special_prosecutor_for_criminal_leaks

You really stepped in it this time, dumbass (chortle).

> > A President can actually do and say whatever the fuck he wants.
>
> Wrong.
>

No, you're wrong. And believe me, stupid, if there's anyone who can't get away with just posting the word "wrong," it's you. You enjoy no presumption of intelligence, whatsoever.

[BTSinAustin]

Yup, I heard it too but can't find the clip. He was asked if any president had ever asked him to end an investigation and he said "no".

[BTSinAustin]

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 7:14:53 PM UTC-5, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
> Bea Foroni <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:48:46 PM UTC-7, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
> >> Bea Foroni <wilm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >Actually, it did happened. On May 3rd Comey testified no one asked him
> >> >to end the investigation.
> >> > ...
> >>
> >> No, No, No. On 3 May Comey said that no one *at DOJ* had
> >> asked him to end the investigation.
> >
> >I understand what you are saying. And I believe you are correct, but
> >doing searches I get the same video snippet of Comey and the Rep. from
> >Hawaii. I don't post videos, and I can't find the transcript for the few
> >second exchange that has caused the right wing Trump supporters to write
> >things like this;
> > ...
>
> Here's the transcript:
> <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/03/wolf.02.html>
>
> --bks

I stand corrected. Thanks

[BTSinAustin]

Ok, I was wrong, BKS's transcript proved it

[Bradley K. Sherman]

BTSinAustin <btsin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...

>Ok, I was wrong, BKS's transcript proved it

An honest man!

--bks

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Oops!
|
| Attorney General Jeff Sessions did not disclose meetings he
| had last year with Russian officials when he applied for
| his security clearance, the Justice Department told CNN
| Wednesday.
| ...
<http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/24/politics/jeff-sessions-russian-officials-meetings/index.html>

--bks

[Dutch]

Trump attempted to use his position as POTUS to derail an FBI
investigation into possible criminal behavior by Flynn. That is textbook
obstruction of justice.

The parallels with Nixon are uncanny.

Nixon’s impeachment articles stated that, "using the powers of his high
office, (he) engaged personally and through his subordinates and agents
in a course of conduct or plan designed to delay, impede, and obstruct
the investigation of such unlawful entry; to cover up, conceal and
protect those responsible; and to conceal the existence and scope of
other unlawful covert activities."

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 2:59:08 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:



>
> No, you're wrong. And believe me, stupid, if there's anyone who can't get away with just posting the word "wrong," it's you [Jerry]. You enjoy no presumption of intelligence, whatsoever.


chortle!!!

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 3:48:20 PM UTC-7, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:



>
> An honest man!
>
> --bks


That's more than anyone could say for you, fuckface. It will be a cold day when you say something honest.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Do all Trumpettes bleed vodka?
|
| The Republican candidate for Montana's congressional seat
| slammed a Guardian reporter to the floor on the eve of the
| state's special election, breaking his glasses and
| shouting, "Get the hell out of here."
| ...
| On 28 April, Jacobs reported on Gianforte's financial ties
| to Russian companies that have been sanctioned by the US.
| ...
<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/24/greg-gianforte-bodyslams-reporter-ben-jacobs-montana>

--bks

[risky biz]

People like you should have to pass a citizenship test before they're allowed to vote. The kind of test that any new Muslim immigrant would have to pass and which you would, quite clearly, fail.

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 2:59:08 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:

> On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 9:12:57 AM UTC-4, VegasJerry wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 7:50:02 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:
> > > It seems many are the baboons who don't understand that these various officials all work
> > > for the president and he can say whatever he feels like saying to them.
> >
> > It appears you’re “the baboon who doesn’t understand” because they don’t.
>
> Oh yes, dumbass, it's absolutely the case.
>
>
> >
> > > it's Trump who classifies and declassifies information, etc.
> >
> > Wrong.
> >
>
> No, you're wrong. Funny that you should tee yourself up like that. Pat Buchanan wrote this column after I made my post on the subject. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_pat_buchanan/a_special_prosecutor_for_criminal_leaks

Pat Buchanan says? OK. That pretty much settles it. Pat Buchanan, Senior Advisor to the Nixon administration? That worked out just dandy, didn't it? lol@'travel'. What a comedian.

[VegasJerry]

On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 2:59:08 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:

> On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 9:12:57 AM UTC-4, VegasJerry wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 7:50:02 PM UTC-7, Travel wrote:
> > > It seems many are the baboons who don't understand that these various officials all work
> > > for the president and he can say whatever he feels like saying to them.

> > It appears you’re “the baboon who doesn’t understand” because they don’t.

> Oh yes, dumbass, it's absolutely the case.

I’m pleased I’ve finally gotten through to you.

> > > it's Trump who classifies and declassifies information, etc.

> > Wrong.

> No, you're wrong.

AH! You’re still ignorant. Should’a known…

> Funny that you should tee yourself up like that. Pat Buchanan wrote this column after I made
> my post on the subject. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_pat_buchanan/a_special_prosecutor_for_criminal_leaks

And I’m still right. “Funny that you should tee yourself up like that,” by not noticing that even Buchanan didn’t say that Trump classifies the material.

See your error? (Answer required).

> You really stepped in it this time, dumbass (chortle).

And as I just showed, ‘twas you…

> > > A President can actually do and say whatever the fuck he wants.

> > Wrong.

> No, you're wrong.

Bucananan agrees with me. See your error? (Answer required).

> And believe me, stupid, if there's anyone who can't get away with just posting the word
> "wrong," it's you. You enjoy no presumption of intelligence, whatsoever.

Yet just proven smarter than you…
(No admission required for the obvious)


Jerry

[Bradley K. Sherman]

|
| Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and one of his
| senior advisers, has come under FBI scrutiny in the Russia
| investigation, multiple U.S. officials told NBC News.
| ...
<http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jared-kushner-now-under-fbi-scrutiny-russia-probe-say-officials-n764826>

--bks

[Bradley K. Sherman]

|
| Russian ambassador told Moscow that Kushner wanted secret
| communications channel with Kremlin
|
| Jared Kushner and Russia's ambassador to Washington
| discussed the possibility of setting up a secret and secure
| communications channel between Trump's transition team and
| the Kremlin, using Russian diplomatic facilities in an
| apparent move to shield their pre-inauguration discussions
| from monitoring, according to U.S. officials briefed on
| intelligence reports.
| ...
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-ambassador-told-moscow-that-kushner-wanted-secret-communications-channel-with-kremlin/2017/05/26/520a14b4-422d-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html>

--bks

[risky biz]

Trump and his inner circle are all traitorous bastards and the other Republicans better smarten up and let go of those tarbabies if they know what's good for them. I haven't, however, seen any indication that Pence was in on any of this.

[VegasJerry]

Didn't he, too, meet with a Russian? We know he lied about knowing about Finn.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

|
| Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and senior
| adviser, was looking for a direct line to President
| Vladimir V. Putin of Russia -- a search that in
| mid-December found him in a room with a Russian banker
| whose financial institution was deeply intertwined with
| Russian intelligence, and remains under sanction by the
| United States.
|
| Federal and congressional investigators are now examining
| what exactly Mr. Kushner and the Russian banker, Sergey N.
| Gorkov, wanted from each other. The banker is a close
| associate of Mr. Putin, but he has not been known to play a
| diplomatic role for the Russian leader. That has raised
| questions about why he was meeting with Mr. Kushner at a
| crucial moment in the presidential transition, according to
| current and former officials familiar with the
| investigations.
| ...
<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/29/us/politics/jared-kushner-russia-investigation.html>

--bks

[popinjay]

On Saturday, May 27, 2017 at 5:44:33 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:



>
> We know he lied about knowing about Finn.

Show us.