America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 38,689 comments
  • 1,585,250 views
Not since Paris Hilton ("That's Hot") have I seen a claim that stupid. :lol:

Although, IIRC he did once try to copyright "you're fired" so it's not that surprising to see him take credit for an ancient saying.
And we all laughed when North Korea claimed Kim Jong-il had invented the jellybean ...
 
I don't really care about what Clinton would have done or wouldn't have done. The fact is that Trump has done it, and did it last week, and it looks incredibly bad on him right now.

Pointing to "Yeah but if it was Hillary..." seems to be a distraction and it takes away from the issue of what's actually happening.

Who is Comey's successor going to be? A Trump lackey who will close down the investigation into his campaign? A campaign which would obviously have nothing to do with him personally?

Oh don't misunderstand, I don't really care about what's actually happening with Comey (although I'm repeatedly impressed by how easily people latch on to the next story). I care about how insanely hypocritical so many people on the left seem to be by going after Trump while, in some cases, even publicly admitting that they'd be fine if Hillary did the same thing.

It's rare that you see such outright admission of double-standards. Yea, Hillary would be attacked by the republicans for firing Comey (no matter when), and Trump is being attacked by democrats for firing Comey (no matter when). The reality is somewhere in between. It looks bad (no matter who is doing it), but it's going to look bad no matter what.

Always a classy move to take to twitter and make threats. Trump is a classy guy.
 
Last edited:
The amount of hypocrisy in politics (especially in joournalism/twitter) nowadays is exactly why I hate it to begin with.
Here's a few:
-Slate (I think) writes an article in 2012 how the Electoral College needs to stay, and then in 2016 says it's a tool of white nationalism and bigotry
-Daily Kos writes an article before the end of Obama's presidency saying Comey needs to be fired, then in 2017 writes an article about how Trump is a Nixonian for firing Comey
-Schumer, Clinton, Waters, and Warren called for Comey's firing before Trump actually did it, now are mad he did so
-John Podesta called for Comey firing, then tries to slam Trump for firing him

Trump could LITERALLY just accidentally fart and CNN would make a headline about it saying Trump is "immature" and "gross."
 
Oh don't misunderstand, I don't really care about what's actually happening with Comey (although I'm repeatedly impressed by how easily people latch on to the next story). I care about how insanely hypocritical so many people on the left seem to be by going after Trump while, in some cases, even publicly admitting that they'd be fine if Hillary did the same thing.

It's rare that you see such outright admission of double-standards. Yea, Hillary would be attacked by the republicans for firing Comey (no matter when), and Trump is being attacked by democrats for firing Comey (no matter when). The reality is somewhere in between. It looks bad (no matter who is doing it), but it's going to look bad no matter what.

Always a classy move to take to twitter and make threats. Trump is a classy guy.

May I enquire as to your thoughts on the actual firing of Comey and the hypothesis that it is to do with the investigation into the Trump election campaing?

All hypocritical reactions aside.
 
May I enquire as to your thoughts on the actual firing of Comey and the hypothesis that it is to do with the investigation into the Trump election campaing?

All hypocritical reactions aside.

There is definitely some evidence or the investigation isn't public.
 
That only works if somebody suggests that the Russians dismissed Comey. Out of all the mad stuff I've read this week that would be a new one ;)
I know. Just joking about possible #russiansdidit. ;)
(AFAIK Trump was under investigation by FBI over alleged connections with RF + Comey recently called Russia "the greatest threat of any nation", so...)
 
I can't wait for him to do a tell all, and making both side wished they never had fired him.
Which immediately makes me wonder what Trump said to Comey that he doesn't want being made public.

Exactly why I said what I did, cause I'm sure he has plenty of dirt on them and would make a great New York Times best seller.
 
Exactly why I said what I did, cause I'm sure he has plenty of dirt on them and would make a great New York Times best seller.
My more immediate concern is that Trump is trying to quash something that the public has a need to know, and a need to know now. But I don't think Comey could be bullied into silencd to easily - after all, he announced the follow-up investigation into Clinton.
 
My more immediate concern is that Trump is trying to quash something that the public has a need to know, and a need to know now. But I don't think Comey could be bullied into silencd to easily - after all, he announced the follow-up investigation into Clinton.

Quash it how, Comey knows the letter of the law I'd say much better than a hot headed Trump in front of computer screen on twitter. So I feel and idle threat is just that to be honest
 
My more immediate concern is that Trump is trying to quash something that the public has a need to know, and a need to know now. But I don't think Comey could be bullied into silencd to easily - after all, he announced the follow-up investigation into Clinton.

I read the tweet's meaning completely the other way around - the implication was that Trump is recording meetings rather than Comey.
 
People close to Trump say he has a history of recording phone calls.

Spicer also refused to deny that conversations were recorded, which would be odd if he really didn't.

I've seen some discussions on the legality of even recording a conversation like that. DC is a one party consent state, meaning it would be legal if only Trump knew it was being recorded. But could such a recording be subpoenaed as a public record? I would imagine in a criminal case, especially one where interfering with an investigation is a possible charge, a recording like that would absolutely be evidence and destroying it would be a crime in itself.
 
In the case of Nixon, a crime had been committed, multiple burglars had been caught red-handed. Nixon fired Archibald Cox because Cox was getting too close to establishing a connection between the burglars and him.

In the case of Trump, what crime has been committed that could be charged to him?

The real Russia-gate scandal:
https://consortiumnews.com/2017/05/11/the-scandal-hidden-behind-russia-gate/
Nixon wasn't charged or with the crime of burglary but rather obstruction of justice.
The act of covering something up is a crime.
 
I read the tweet's meaning completely the other way around - the implication was that Trump is recording meetings rather than Comey.
Either way, it doesn't change the fact that he's trying to bully Comey into silence. If Trump is recording the meetings, the implication is that Comey said something foolish or embarrassing - even something innocuous that takes on a more sinister bent when presented out of context (ie changing "if Clinton is guilty, we will prosecute" to "Clinton is guilty") - then Trump will release the tapes to damage Comey's reputation. But I do find the use of inverted commas around "tapes" to be telling; it implies that anything Comey releases is manipulated ot fabricated.

But whatever the case, it suggests that Comey knows something that Trump doesn't want public.
 
JIM YOU BETTER FIND ME THE LAST WU-TANG ALBUM BY MAY DAY OR YOU'RE FIRED!

Who in their right mind would want that though :sly:

It was probably more like...

"James you better figure a way to bring ODB back from the dead and reunite the Clan in time for Cochella"

Clearly he missed the deadline by a few miles.
 
Back