Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

The president has the final say in what is classified or not. Comey does not.It is interesting the leftist never find anything wrong.I will also use your own leftist words against you. Just because you think that Trump did something wrong does not make a wrong by somebody else right.

L L wrote:

New Trump tweet:

"James Comey leaked CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the media. That is so illegal!"

I guess they can look into that and see if it's true or another Trump lie.

Here is what we do know and has been confirmed:

Trump leaked formerly classified information to the Russians.

That's not hearsay. When the Russians were in the White House, he gave them information that he received from other nations that was meant only for US intelligence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-revealed-highly-classified-information-to-russian-foreign-minister-and-ambassador/2017/05/15/530c172a-3960-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.781446d4fd9e

We're not going to forget news from a couple of months ago.

Trump is insane.

itsbaddude wrote:

The president has the final say in what is classified or not.

He sure does, comrade.

This WP story feels like a Breitbart article. A mixture of fact and opinion passed on as fact. They even use a flow chart to show which document the reporter thinks Comey leak.Not fake news. There needs to be an investigation. According to him there were some memos with classified information on them. I don't think anyone has seen was leaked. The Fox and Hill report are good enough. Not all the details may be correct, but the gist of the story is correct. You choose to dismiss the whole thing because you hate Trump.Also,"Which is not to say that Comey’s behavior was without concern. FBI agents sign an agreement prohibiting unauthorized disclosures of certain types of material. The Hill’s report notes that the FBI apparently considers Comey’s memos to have been government documents, not his own personal memos as he asserted on Capitol Hill. The repercussions of that aren’t clear."I also find the following the end quote on the WP story very hypocritical and funny."But it appears that the opportunity to hammer his political opponents is often too urgent in his mind to ensure that he’s doing so accurately."

eric a blair wrote:

Here's a rundown on the comey memos. The right wing newspeople are leading with a false story - that comey leaked classified info on his memos. that is apparently not true. But the right wingers are using it as a way to distract from junior's collusionary meeting with the Russians.

In a nutshell, comey wrote 7 memos. four had classified info. Those stayed in house. He wrote 3 with no classified info. On purpose. He gave those 3 to his friend.

So hey right wingers - time to yell fake news at Fox and DJT. Ready.....go!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/07/10/trump-accuses-james-comey-of-breaking-the-law-based-on-a-misleading-fox-news-report/?utm_term=.08060442e871

The most disturbing part of these articles is how much damn tv our president watches while he's not playing golf. I'll take a Muslim Kenyan any day over this whiny draft dodger, who wears makeup.

LaughingOutLoud wrote:

"Eric a blair" = "agip"

That's hilarious!!!!

.

Wow. He's really in your head, isn't he.

Comey did not trust Trump and knew that Trump would come after him. He is a smart man and there is no way he would make himself vulnerable by leaking classified information and then tell everyone that he leaked that information. He did say he wrote some classified memo's but despite what the ultra-right wants to make of it, he didn't leak those memos. Trump lied in his tweet or he was just plain ignorant. In any event his tweet was fake news. Comey did not leak classified information. He's just not that stupid.As far as Comey violating a signed agreement about not releasing FBI information, I'm not sure what that includes. FBI guys have written books. If the information is one's own memo's can they be released. Again, Comey is a smart guy who knew he was going to be attacked, I doubt he would violate FBI laws.Trump was right about one thing. Comey is a grandstander. I don't think he would violate any agreement because he had to know the Trump people would come after him. However, I do see him violating FBI protocol, so that he can grandstand. Comey has a huge ego and likes to be at the center of things.But maybe Trump just wanted to take attention away from juniors problems.

exthrower wrote:

Dude, Meeting with people to get opposition info is done all the time....He did nothing illegal or wrong.....

Oh yes, people knowingly seek out opposition information from foreign attorneys who represent the interests of hostile authoritarian regimes all the time! Who are you calling desperate, dude?

On another note, the "failing" NY Times' reporting on this has been outstanding. Put out a little bit of incriminating news, let the Traitor Administration lie about it, then put out more information that directly contradicts the narrative they are trying to create.

Conundrum wrote:

Part of the problem is that there is so much the Trump does on a daily based that its hard to focus on one issue too long.

Just the opposite, really. He's doing nothing but watching TV, playing golf, and posting nonsense on the Twitter.

We need more deep thoughts from the Dear Leader on Economics.

Maybe tomorrow we can get some history with vaguely racist undertones.

itsbaddude wrote:

The president has the final say in what is classified or not. Comey does not.

I was careful with my words and said that Trump leaked "formerly" classified information.

In other words, Trump leaked highly sensitive information that should not be in the wrong person's hands and was careless of national security.

So what if he can legally declassify it.

I guess he can legally give your internet browsing history to the Russians.

But he shouldn't.

We don't know what Trump is talking about when he says Comey leaked classified material.

It's a vague accusation similar to the Obama wire tap accusation that was false.

I assume Comey will now be prosecuted. If not, then it's another super irresponsible act by this president.

exthrower wrote:

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Still not a peep from Breitbart on Junior's latest bed-sh*tting episode. Our Traitor in Chief and his minions sure are taking a while to get their stories straight.

Dude, Meeting with people to get opposition info is done all the time....He did nothing illegal or wrong.....

The lady was a lawyer from Russia, he wasn't meeting with a representative of the Russian government...

She started talking about Russian adoptions and nothing ever came of the meeting...

You people are desperate.....

wrongo bongo. Again!

junior has committed a federal crime - he wanted oppo research, which is a thing of great value. if a campaign solicits things of value from foreigners, that's a federal crime

eric a blair wrote:

exthrower wrote:

Dude, Meeting with people to get opposition info is done all the time....He did nothing illegal or wrong.....

The lady was a lawyer from Russia, he wasn't meeting with a representative of the Russian government...

She started talking about Russian adoptions and nothing ever came of the meeting...

You people are desperate.....

wrongo bongo. Again!

junior has committed a federal crime - he wanted oppo research, which is a thing of great value. if a campaign solicits things of value from foreigners, that's a federal crime

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/7/10/15950590/donald-trump-jr-new-york-times-illegal

It's been interesting how the denials have evolved:

First, it was, "Nobody on the campaign had meetings with the Russians."

Then, it was, "We had meetings but nothing important was discussed."

Then, it was, "We discussed things like sanctions, but there was no collusion."

Now, it's, "There might have been collusion, but that's not a crime."

Attorneys are coming out of the woodwork to say, "Depending on the specifics of these meetings, there are several crimes that might have been committed."

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

We do need a leader who will try to reason through problems and act responsibly. What we have is a president who acts and communicates recklessly and frequently though twitter. He also has had other numerous weird behaviors which along with questionable ethics from his campaign folks being constantly uncovered, creates a daily barrage that is hard for the media to address properly.It also makes this behavior seen less shocking because it's become common.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

Part of the problem is that there is so much the Trump does on a daily based that its hard to focus on one issue too long.

Just the opposite, really. He's doing nothing but watching TV, playing golf, and posting nonsense on the Twitter.

We need more deep thoughts from the Dear Leader on Economics.

Maybe tomorrow we can get some history with vaguely racist undertones.

exthrower wrote:

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Still not a peep from Breitbart on Junior's latest bed-sh*tting episode. Our Traitor in Chief and his minions sure are taking a while to get their stories straight.

Dude, Meeting with people to get opposition info is done all the time....He did nothing illegal or wrong.....

The lady was a lawyer from Russia, he wasn't meeting with a representative of the Russian government...

She started talking about Russian adoptions and nothing ever came of the meeting...

You people are desperate.....

While I agree that a lot of people on the left are using this investigation as a "get out of jail free" card to invalidate the election, I think it's important to understand the depth (or shallowness) of interactions between the Trump campaign and Russian citizens.

Anyone who can think rationally agrees that Trump did not conspire directly with Putin to hack into voting machines throughout the country and modify election results. Trump obviously won the electoral college. That makes him the legitimately-elected president. However, if a campaign (with or without the knowledge of the candidate) attempts to work with a foreign government to influence a domestic election through propaganda, that is a concern to me. Why is a campaign trying to involve a foreign government? If they win the election, will they be beholden to that government? It casts doubt on an administration's loyalty to its own country.

That being said, even if campaign members are meeting with foreign citizens who are not connected to their foreign government, why wouldn't they mention the meetings in the first place in order to avoid the appearance of impropriety? That is the most indicative part of this story, in my opinion. I'm not saying that they should be thrown in jail simply for talking to a foreigner, but I think the people have a right to know who is influencing their politicians (and their advisors).

And yes, I realize that Clinton and the Democrats also interact with foreigners, but that is not relevant right now.

What law is he specifically breaking? For it to be collusion, it would need to be a secret (true) or illegal meeting to defraud or cheat someone ( not sure about the last part)Or is there another law about receiving campaign contributions from a foreign country......even that might be a stretch.Certainly particularly with the lies leading up to it. It all just adds to the stench.

eric a blair wrote:

exthrower wrote:

Dude, Meeting with people to get opposition info is done all the time....He did nothing illegal or wrong.....

The lady was a lawyer from Russia, he wasn't meeting with a representative of the Russian government...

She started talking about Russian adoptions and nothing ever came of the meeting...

You people are desperate.....

wrongo bongo. Again!

junior has committed a federal crime - he wanted oppo research, which is a thing of great value. if a campaign solicits things of value from foreigners, that's a federal crime

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/7/10/15950590/donald-trump-jr-new-york-times-illegal

[quote]Fat hurts wrote:

First, it was, "Nobody on the campaign had meetings with the Russians."

Then, it was, "We had meetings but nothing important was discussed."

Then, it was, "We discussed things like sanctions, but there was no collusion."

Now, it's, "There might have been collusion, but that's not a crime."

quote]

really it's more that junior said 'I tried to collude with a hostile power but my source didn't cooperate'

it's like saying 'I did go to meet with the thief to buy stolen property but he didn't have anything I wanted'

or 'I went to a meeting with an enemy spy but he didn't want want I had to sell so nothing happened.'

stunningly stupid statement by junior when he admitted he spoke to a Russian about oppo research. It's been pointed out several times that the Gore campaign notified the FBI when stolen Bush2 campaign data showed up in their mailbox.

the amazing thing is that this is EXACTLY what anti-trumpers said would happen. And here we are. The western alliances cracking. multiple scandals in the WH, the WH setting a horrid moral tone for the nation.

great job white people. clap. clap. clap.

read the Vox piece. Just the act of soliciting a thing of value from a foreigner is a crime for a campaign. Junior said to the world he went to the meeting to solicit a thing of value. And maybe manafort and Kushner are guilty too. what a mess.

Conundrum wrote:

What law is he specifically breaking? For it to be collusion, it would need to be a secret (true) or illegal meeting to defraud or cheat someone ( not sure about the last part)

Or is there another law about receiving campaign contributions from a foreign country......even that might be a stretch.

Certainly particularly with the lies leading up to it. It all just adds to the stench.

eric a blair wrote:

wrongo bongo. Again!

junior has committed a federal crime - he wanted oppo research, which is a thing of great value. if a campaign solicits things of value from foreigners, that's a federal crime

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/7/10/15950590/donald-trump-jr-new-york-times-illegal

I honestly see nothing productive about you entering the topic of race into this. It seems to be a comment aimed at creating dissension.

Truthfully, disappointed that you made that comment.

well it was a bit of an unnecessary cheap shot

but it needs to be said that Trump campaigned on white identity politics and millions of his voters responded exactly to that. That's a major part of the point of history we are living through. tens of millions of angry white people, falling into majority minority status and worried that they are losing their culture and country.

sweeping that under the carpet is just another form of lying.

Well there is that element without question but there are other reasons why Hillary lost too. And remember a number of whites voted against Trump. And if the racist vote was as strong as you imply would Obama have been elected twice with the majority of votes he received?I

eric a blair wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

I honestly see nothing productive about you entering the topic of race into this. It seems to be a comment aimed at creating dissension.

Truthfully, disappointed that you made that comment.

well it was a bit of an unnecessary cheap shot

but it needs to be said that Trump campaigned on white identity politics and millions of his voters responded exactly to that. That's a major part of the point of history we are living through. tens of millions of angry white people, falling into majority minority status and worried that they are losing their culture and country.

sweeping that under the carpet is just another form of lying.