Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Reporterz wrote:

agip wrote:

no - that part is my conclusion.

But hard to not come to that conclusion. I mean according to the report, the AG said 'eh, comey, you really shouldn't tell the world about the wiener laptop emails this close to the election.'

Comey ignored that advice, announced the reopening of the election, and that probably threw the 70k votes to trump that decided the election. Comey said 'f it, I'll just be open with the American people and hope it all turns out ok.'

Hard to come up with a real interpretation other than that one.

Where did you get 70k?

“I am numb,” the attorney wrote on Nov. 9, 2016, the day after President Trump’s election.

“I am so stressed about what I could have done differently,” the lawyer continued, apparently referring to the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe.

The attorney’s messages show that he was distressed at the FBI’s decision in October 2016 to re-open the investigation into Clinton’s emails. Democrats have claimed that decision hurt Clinton at the polls.

The FBI lawyer also suggested that he would work to resist the Trump administration.

“Is it making you rethink your commitment to the Trump administration?” one FBI lawyer wrote on Nov. 22, 2016.

“Hell no. Viva le resistance,” the future Mueller attorney responded.

power to the people wrote:

It just keeps coming..... We have some baaaad people in the FBI.....

All the keep the outsider from the White House. OOOOOOPS!!

http://amp.dailycaller.com/2018/06/14/ig-report-fbi-agents-bribed-journalists/?__twitter_impression=true

I think this is evident in the culture of other government agencies as well. IMO it’s a symptom of poor morale caused by Trump’s appointment of loyalist leaders and constant public criticism of the agencies.

So even if this represents poor morale, what does it have to do with Trump’s investigation? Do you have proof they don’t conduct investigations properly, despite the DOJ report saying otherwise? And is your proposal to dismantle the FBI or any agency because people working for them are not loyal to the POTUS?

agip wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

He made the decision to focus on the Trump investigation and minimize the Hillary investigation.

without any reporting! Gary knows this! You are so plugged in, man!

you got anything on the kiddie sex ring out of the pizza parlor? or that the Obama admin used unmasking inappropriately? or that there was a spy planted in the trump campaign? maybe wiretaps on Trump?

cause you know stuff no one else does. We're depending on you to bring this stuff out - otherwise you are just helping the Dems on their true mission - to put all conservatives into concentration camps. Which, I believe, you have also reported to us. I KNOW you don't want to support the Dems on that mission.

speak up, man!

Says the guy who knows the wiener announcement swayed the election to the tune of 70K votes. Lol

Dude he also refused to put the FBI stamp on a multi-agency report declaring there was proof Russia hacked the DNC and that they were also investigating any Russian connection to Trump’s campaign. That’s a fact that obviously goes against the trumper theory. If Comey wanted to help Hillary, he would 1) have quickly closed the investigation instead of letting it drag on during the most critical stages of the election and 2) would have never decided to reopen the investigation right before Election Day. The backlash that followed was his oops moment - when he realized that despite trying to not look political, he ended up helping Trump.

agip wrote:

Reporterz wrote:

Where did you get 70k?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/donald-trump-will-be-president-thanks-to-80000-people-in-three-states/?utm_term=.4abd211f2e65

No. How do you the announcement swayed those 70k?

What is lost on all this partisan bickering is that we have a very incompetent and corrupt FBI.

Doesn't this concern any of you? Or are you too busy trying to win points for your side?

Reporterz wrote:

No. How do you the announcement swayed those 70k?

Oops. My extreme ignorance. 70k who intended to vote for Clinton did not vote at all due to meddling against Clinton by the deep state FBI.

Reporterz wrote:

agip wrote:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/donald-trump-will-be-president-thanks-to-80000-people-in-three-states/?utm_term=.4abd211f2e65

No. How do you the announcement swayed those 70k?

I can't prove that obviously

Let me restate that:

You people are pathetic wrote:

What is lost on all this partisan bickering is that we have a very incompetent and corrupt POTUS.

Doesn't this concern any of you? Or are you too busy trying to win points for your side?

agip wrote:

Reporterz wrote:

No. How do you the announcement swayed those 70k?

I can't prove that obviously

but Nate the Great agrees with me

agip wrote:

agip wrote:

I can't prove that obviously

but Nate the Great agrees with me

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-comey-letter-probably-cost-clinton-the-election/

You have yet to answer the question.

There's no way of determining whether Comey's announcement right before the election regarding Clinton's emails swayed the election. It could have. That's about all which can be said about it.

The fact that there was no public acknowledgement of an investigation of the Trump/Russia potential connection is a major issue as well.

What the IGs report shows that the FBI, if the bureau had any affect on the election, likely steered it towards Trump.

Of course, we have the Idiot in Charge telling anyone who's not laughing (read FoxNews and their viewers) that this report somehow exonerates him.

Reporterz wrote:

Reporterz wrote:

No. How do you the announcement swayed those 70k?

Oops. My extreme ignorance. 70k who intended to vote for Clinton did not vote at all due to meddling against Clinton by the deep state FBI.

I get that you got caught just making stuff up, but using someone else's handle to try to get back at them just makes you look more pathetic.

whatabowtism wrote:

There's no way of determining whether Comey's announcement right before the election regarding Clinton's emails swayed the election. It could have. That's about all which can be said about it.

The fact that there was no public acknowledgement of an investigation of the Trump/Russia potential connection is a major issue as well.

What the IGs report shows that the FBI, if the bureau had any affect on the election, likely steered it towards Trump.

Of course, we have the Idiot in Charge telling anyone who's not laughing (read FoxNews and their viewers) that this report somehow exonerates him.

No. It changed 70,000 votes. HRC would be POTUS right now if it wasn't for Comey.

agip wrote:

Reporterz wrote:

No. How do you the announcement swayed those 70k?

I can't prove that obviously

Then why would you even throw that out there?

It doesn’t help your case. It just makes you look like a hack making sh1t up.

Obviously. wrote:

agip wrote:

I can't prove that obviously

Then why would you even throw that out there?

It doesn’t help your case. It just makes you look like a hack making sh1t up.

dude, it's a reasonable guess. The dean of US political polling analysis agrees with me. I used the word 'probably' in my post, indicating that I didn't know for sure. If I had written "the comey letter 100% for sure no doubts handed the election to Trump' then that would be questionable. But I stuck the word 'probably' in there to show I wasn't sure.

agip wrote:

Obviously. wrote:

Then why would you even throw that out there?

It doesn’t help your case. It just makes you look like a hack making sh1t up.

dude, it's a reasonable guess. The dean of US political polling analysis agrees with me. I used the word 'probably' in my post, indicating that I didn't know for sure. If I had written "the comey letter 100% for sure no doubts handed the election to Trump' then that would be questionable. But I stuck the word 'probably' in there to show I wasn't sure.

...with no basis in fact.

Obviously. wrote:

agip wrote:

dude, it's a reasonable guess. The dean of US political polling analysis agrees with me. I used the word 'probably' in my post, indicating that I didn't know for sure. If I had written "the comey letter 100% for sure no doubts handed the election to Trump' then that would be questionable. But I stuck the word 'probably' in there to show I wasn't sure.

...with no basis in fact.

interesting how he came up with THAT number