Comments 1 - 40 of 52       Last »     Search these comments

1   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   2017 Mar 3, 4:09pm  

He's just getting warmed up.

2   Tenpoundbass   2017 Mar 4, 6:36pm  

Says the panic parade going ape shit batty in the peanut gallery. That has told a quadrillion lies just on Inauguration day alone.
Says the assholes that interrupted speeches all over America today because the Liberals hate people.
Quit being George Soro's bitches, it's unbecoming of the Democrats.
George Soros Bitches!

3   Strategist   2017 Mar 4, 6:55pm  

Trump is now a politician. Politicians lying is acceptable the world over.

4   RealEstateIsBetterThanStocks   2017 Mar 4, 11:27pm  

after years of corruption by Obama and Hillary, now the democrats want a PERFECT candidate?

5   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 5, 10:47pm  

marcus says

Trump's treasonous behavior is just fake news. Nothing to see here.

OMG!!! Jeff Session didnt specifically mention his routine and publicly disclosed meeting w a Russian ambassador when asked if Trump's team strategized with Russia...The logical conclusion: TREASON!

Tell me again how this is totally not fake news...

6   OneTwo   2017 Mar 5, 11:33pm  

CBOEtrader says

OMG!!! Jeff Session didnt specifically mention his routine and publicly disclosed meeting w a Russian ambassador when asked if Trump's team strategized with Russia...The logical conclusion: TREASON!

Tell me again how this is totally not fake news...

Er because he denied doing that and so, arguably, perjured himself during his confirmation hearing for the position of Attorney General of all things. Explain to me how that is NOT news.

7   marcus   2017 Mar 6, 12:09am  

CBOEtrader says

The logical conclusion: TREASON!

Tell me again how this is totally not fake news...

I'm not sure. But for some reason Trump sure wants to distract from it. Maybe this is strategy, if the govt. was investigating the Russian connection back in October without sufficient evidence. But they have said that there is evidence of Russian activity related to our election. Also server connections between Trump computers and Russian. Maybe that's what those warrants were about ?

I don't know, but I wonder how many people think that Trumps accusations of Obama putting wiretaps on him, make Trump look a little desperate.

8   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 12:28am  

marcus says

Also server connections between Trump computers and Russian. Maybe that's what those warrants were about ?

That's what I heard as well. How did they know about the server in the first place? They did their secret investigation and found nothing incriminating for trump. They supposedly did find evidence of Russian hacking, but i haven't seen any reliable reports.

9   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 2:11am  

Wire-taps are already rubber stamped against political opponents, why not the full investigation as well?

eye roll

At this point the question is irrelevant. They may as well do an official investigation. They already wire tapped the POTUS during elections under seeming weak pretenses to gain an advantage for hillary.

I keep waiting for relevant facts... But alas...

10   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 2:24am  

Stop playing these games.

I said a "shred" of evidence to which you replied "that's odd..."

If a "shred" of evidence is too much, then we are a police state.

What in your opinion justifies an investigation?

11   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 3:33am  

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/full-clapper-no-evidence-of-collusion-between-trump-and-russia-890509379597

Possible not plausible from what I've seen.

Selfishly id like to satiate my curiosity. Executive overreach in 2016 also to be investigated...

12   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   2017 Mar 6, 4:51am  

There has to be some circumstantial evidence for Congress to launch a formal investigation. Otherwise, they would be investigating everything. In unfortunate fact, most of what determines whether or not there is an investigation. It should be based on some amount of evidence.

The Trump team had a lot of contact with the Russians. Manafort was the big one. Then there was Flynn. Then, for some reason, many others were talking with the Russians during the campaign, e.g. Sessions and Kushner. They all (except Manafort) denied any contact, and then confessed to lying later. Sessions lied under oath. Trump himself said he me Putin, then said he had never met him. Trump publicly asked Russia to hack Clinton's emails. Take it as earnest or rhetorical, but throw that oddity onto the pile of circumstance. I believe that the Trump campaign had advance notice on the Wikileaks information. Roger Stone admitted to talking with a mutual friend of Assange about the Wikileaks data. He denies having seen the information in advance. But Wikileaks timed the data dump to have maximum impact on our election. Our intel agencies state that it is likely that Wikileaks data came from the Russians. In my opinion, that's enough reason for an investigation.

13   Y   2017 Mar 6, 5:29am  

this.
The only difference between trump and all the rest of the pols is that, being a multi billionaire, he doesn't try to hide his lies as he really doesn't give a fuck about winning another election.
Thats what makes them seem so surreal...

Strategist says

Trump is now a politician. Politicians lying is acceptable the world over.

14   Y   2017 Mar 6, 5:32am  

it runs in the family

15   OneTwo   2017 Mar 6, 6:27am  

Macropodia says

This is damning evidence...

No, it's not.

Macropodia says

CBO Trader has won this debate with this slam-dunk response.

Which one would that be? His argument seems to be to simply state that the Russia links don't warrant an investigation because they're fake news because he says so (despite rather a lot of, at the very least, circumstantial evidence), whereas Trump's baseless assertions about Obama (evidence free and countered by a number of very senior people, not least the FBI Director FFS) apparently warrant an investigation. And that to you wins the 'debate.' Go figure.

16   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 7:26am  

Rashomon says

Russia links don't warrant an investigation because they're fake news

Facts arent news. The narrative built w the known facts in this case is the fake news.

Rashomon says

because he says so

No, moreso because those who are familiar w the case say there is "zero evidence." See my link. Or just google it.

Rashomon says

Trump's baseless assertions about Obama

Trump and his team were under surveillance. That much has been verified over and over again. Obama's level of involvement is unknown. The level of surveillance is unknown. The details of the warrant issued to tap trump is unknown. I doubt Obama did anything blatantly illegal.

Trump should NOT have sent those tweets. He should let the legal system do the talking for him.

17   OneTwo   2017 Mar 6, 7:39am  

CBOEtrader says

Facts arent news. The narrative built w the known facts in this case is the fake news.

Care to clarify what you consider the fake news aspect of what is being reported? And you do understand that the constant way 'fake news' is being thrown around is a misuse of the term.

CBOEtrader says

... those who are familiar w the case say there is "zero evidence."

Zero evidence? You've had one person resign and the current AG teetering on the brink as we speak. You've had Trump constantly contradict himself with his contact/zero contact with Putin. The hacking, etc. etc. There's rather a lot of things that point to there being an issue.

CBOEtrader says

The level of surveillance is unknown. The details of the warrant issued to tap trump is unknown. I doubt Obama did anything blatantly illegal.

Unknown or non-existent? Obviously a basis for an investigation. Or not. And remind us all again what Trump said about Obama.

CBOEtrader says

Trump should NOT have sent those tweets. He should let the legal system do the talking for him.

The legal system should do what exactly and based on what? You've already had the FBI Director stating the accusations are baseless. You want an investigation based on zero evidence outside of conspiracy websites and an unsupported assertion by a President who plays free and easy with the truth, and yet you argue there shouldn't be one for something where there is a seemingly ever increasing number of incidences that potentially point to an extremely troubling possibility. Like I said, go figure.

18   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 8:20am  

stop bringing reason into the thunderdome

19   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 8:28am  

I would love to see a patricknet moderated ACTUAL digital debate. that'd be fun...

When pressed, 90% of the "lies, lies, LIES" allegations against Trump evaporate into semantics or factless leaps, including but not limited to the supposed Russia/campaign collaboration.

#fakenews is accurate.

Always look for facts underlying any anti-trump claim before buying into the hysteria. As we've seen from this thread and others, there often are none.

20   bob2356   2017 Mar 6, 10:27am  

CBOEtrader says

Trump and his team were under surveillance. That much has been verified over and over again. Obama's level of involvement is unknown. The level of surveillance is unknown. The details of the warrant issued to tap trump is unknown. I doubt Obama did anything blatantly illegal.

Trump should NOT have sent those tweets. He should let the legal system do the talking for him.

Didn't read the tweets did you? Trump said trump tower was tapped, not that he was under surveillance. The only question to be answered about the tweets is whether the phones in trump tower were tapped or not. Since the entire justice department works for trump there shouldn't be any problem finding out in an hour or so if there were or weren't wiretaps on trump tower. Yet nothing except crickets chirping. Seems pretty strange for such a self declared strong effective business leader to not be able to get a simple question answered. Actually it's very strange considering the amount of political damage it would do the Obama and the democrats if true.

I know It's hard, but try to understand the subject matter and stick to it. Focus.

21   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 2:43pm  

Ironman says

marcus says

I don't know, but I wonder how many people think that Trumps accusations of Obama putting wiretaps on him, make Trump look a little desperate.

Well, one of your favorite go to "bibles" for accurate news said his aides were wiretapped, would it be a stretch to think Trump was included too??

-

Yeah there's at least a half dozen media references like that. There are huge queations yet to be answered. Whether or not trump was tapped is not one of them

22   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 2:44pm  

PCGyver says

Ironman says

Well, one of your favorite go to "bibles" for accurate news said his aides were wiretapped, would it be a stretch to think Trump was included too??

Can you please tell us why as commander in chief Trump can't come up with the evidence to support his claim that he was tapped?

It hasn't been a full business day yet... Give them some time.

Most likely his lawyers talked him into restraint of his loose lips.

23   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 2:46pm  

bob2356 says

The only question to be answered about the tweets is whether the phones in trump tower were tapped or not.

The details of the tap are in question.

bob2356 says

I know It's hard, but try to understand the subject matter and stick to it. Focus.

These semantics turned to ad hominem are childish as fuck. Stop embarrassing yourself

24   bob2356   2017 Mar 6, 3:05pm  

Ironman says

bob2356 says

Since the entire justice department works for trump

Really, there are no Obama hold-overs or loyalists still working there?

Any idea how many of Trump's new appointees still haven't been approved by Congress?

Trump is the new boss, they work for him now. You didn't know that somehow?

25   bob2356   2017 Mar 6, 3:09pm  

Ironman says

Well, one of your favorite go to "bibles" for accurate news said his aides were wiretapped,

No actually it says his aides talked to people who were wiretapped. Not at all the same thing.

26   bob2356   2017 Mar 6, 3:13pm  

CBOEtrader says

bob2356 says

The only question to be answered about the tweets is whether the phones in trump tower were tapped or not.

The details of the tap are in question.

The details of what tap? Don't you think someone, that would be trump, should find out if there actually was a tap? That's the whole point.

CBOEtrader says

These semantics turned to ad hominem are childish as fuck.

Translation, I don't know what an ad hominem is. Let's make it simple. you need to stay on subject of you want to present a coherent argument.

27   Heres Your Card   2017 Mar 6, 3:18pm  

bob2356 says

Ironman says

Well, one of your favorite go to "bibles" for accurate news said his aides were wiretapped,

No actually it says his aides talked to people who were wiretapped. Not at all the same thing.

Piggy doesn't read, he just looks at pictures and parrots what he's heard on Fox.

28   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 3:39pm  

bob2356 says

Translation, I don't know what an ad hominem is. Let's make it simple. you need to stay on subject of you want to present a coherent argument.

Take your own advice. I've been very clear. Try reading the posts... Or keep embarrassing yourself w semantics and childish swipes at others.

I'm done w you.

29   OneTwo   2017 Mar 6, 4:46pm  

CBOEtrader says

Yeah there's at least a half dozen media references like that. There are huge queations yet to be answered. Whether or not trump was tapped is not one of them

Except you appear to not want them to be answered. And the wiretapping reports have been clear about what they were referring to - look at the BBC report for example:
BBC, Jan. 12, 2017: "On 15 October, the US secret intelligence court issued a warrant to investigate two Russian banks. This news was given to me by several sources and corroborated by someone I will identify only as a senior member of the US intelligence community. He would never volunteer anything — giving up classified information would be illegal — but he would confirm or deny what I had heard from other sources. …

"Neither Mr Trump nor his associates are named in the FISA order, which would only cover foreign citizens or foreign entities — in this case the Russian banks. But ultimately, the investigation is looking for transfers of money from Russia to the United States, each one, if proved, a felony offence."
That is the gist of the story from anonymous sources, and that is not what Trump tweeted, though it is more than likely where he picked up the bones of the story and then mashed it up into his own particular take.

30   OneTwo   2017 Mar 6, 6:23pm  

The NYT article doesn't actually talk about wiretapping of Trump aides... The anonymous sources said it was a FISA order, so it's directed towards foreign entities - in this case foreign banking transactions, and whether money was funnelled to the campaign illegally.

31   bob2356   2017 Mar 6, 8:39pm  

Ironman says



See where it says "intercepted communications... BETWEEN Russia and associates of Trump.... Manafort..."?

This proves that obama tapped the phones at trump tower how? Gee I wonder who was wiretapped that the communications were intercepted? Do you suppose it could be the russians? OMG who would have thought of it, wiretapping the russians. Certainly no president in history before obama ever wiretapped russian officials. Never, not once. ever. Trumps aides were either pretty amazingly stupid that they didn't realize this or pretty amazing arrogant that they thought it wouldn't matter.

Quick lesson in physics, if a phone is tapped BOTH sides of the conversation are recorded. If trumps people were talking to wiretapped russian officials they got recorded. That's not the same as saying they were the OBJECT of the wiretapping or any surveillance. A concept that you seem to be having a very hard time grasping.

Which leaves the point that wiretapping is but one kind of surveillance. There are many ways to be under surveillance other than wiretapping, I know the difference between the concepts just fine thank you very much. Would you like it explained to you in detail? BTW did you have any kind of point whatsoever with the question about the difference?

32   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 9:42pm  

Wtf r u talking about?

Nm, I really don't care. Try making a point instead of obsessing over me.

Flattered though :/

33   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 9:49pm  

Still obsessed w me rather making a point?

34   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 9:51pm  

I try to understand others. You actively misrepresent others. I guess that's just me. I tend to be more intellectually honest than some people.

Look at your summary of my points, for an example.

For the nth time, do you have a point or are you just obsessed w me?

35   Y   2017 Mar 6, 9:54pm  

Only if you're a 14 year old chilien girl masquarading as a wall street maverick...
CBOEtrader says

For the nth time, do you have a point or are you just obsessed w me?

36   Rew   2017 Mar 6, 10:58pm  

Obama is a secret muslim from Kenya, show me the birth cert.
Obama founded ISIS.
I just found out Obama wiretapped me. (5 minutes later, I'm onto apprentice ratings tweets)
Ted Cruz's father was with Lee Harvey Oswald ...
Crime is rising.
Unemployment is 42%.
Mexico forces bad people into our country.
Illegal immigrants are 30 million+.
There is no system to vet refugees.
My inauguration crowd biggest ever.
Trump U : not A rated by BBB. Winery, small small small, not biggest on east Coast. Art of Deal not best selling book of all time.

Meanwhile:
1) Russia investigations? GAME ON! We are on our way to an independent investigator. Woot woot.
2) All leaked sources in the press have 3-10 sources leaking ... and tRump and the top advisors are PISSED! the State department is especially a freaking sieve. So awesome.

37   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 11:05pm  

Fine. I'll make a deal w you while all of pat.net is watching.

I will quote your message wherein you blatantly misrepresent me, then quote my immediate reply to that message wherein i correct your obvious and willful misquoting.

After I do this, you will admit you are wrong.

Deal?

38   CBOEtrader   2017 Mar 6, 11:12pm  

You cant remember your own posts.I have no motivation to remind you of our recent history if you wont admit to being wrong, after obsessing over me for the last 20 posts. Weird, btw...

Folks, you cant make this shit up. #projectmuch

39   Rew   2017 Mar 6, 11:18pm  

FAKE THREAD!

40   OneTwo   2017 Mar 7, 12:03am  

CBOEtrader says

Your points are a joke. "Putin deserves an award for spying." ? yeah, you got me. EYE ROLL

You sir, are not an honest person.

Hmm, to take the comment literally... or not. What about his other points? They seemed to be pretty representative of the kind of things you were saying. How were you being misrepresented in those?

Comments 1 - 40 of 52       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions