Trump to Comey: You're fired.

[Frederick Foresight]

I think it's quite telling that you boys are afraid to look under the hood for fear of what you might find.

And so, you opt for...bliss of a certain nature.

Meanwhile, your president is serially setting fire to the very institutions that define the country's democracy.

 

[java]

I think it's quite telling that you boys are afraid to look under the hood for fear of what you might find.

And so, you opt for...bliss of a certain nature.

Meanwhile, your president is serially setting fire to the very institutions that define the country's democracy.

Yes, we want the country's democracy re defined. Trump is just a spark. Wait till we start setting fires. I'm talking all serially on your ass.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I think it's quite telling that you boys are afraid to look under the hood for fear of what you might find.

And so, you opt for...bliss of a certain nature.

Meanwhile, your president is serially setting fire to the very institutions that define the country's democracy.

Quite the contrary, at least in my case. If there is dirt, I'm hoping it will come out. I'm hoping that if Trump is really in bed with the Russians, if he is compromising security, that this info comes out and that he is punished accordingly. I hate crooks, and I am a strong advocate of justice, even if your partisanship won't let you see that about me.

But there is a difference between wanting to see the truth and wanting something to be true.

You, and most of the media, are in the latter.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

But there is a difference between wanting to see the truth and wanting something to be true.

Key point. If we were really interested in investigating actual crimes, the FBI would be concentrating on the known crimes, eg illegal unmasking of Trump campaign, the leaks, the Clinton slush fund/foundation, selling access and of course, the email scandal. Instead, dems/media want to push a fake narrative that Russia stole the election and that Trump is somehow compromised. If there were a shred of evidence, wouldn't it have come out by now?

 

[Frederick Foresight]

But there is a difference between wanting to see the truth and wanting something to be true.

There's also a difference between wanting the truth to be actively pursued in an unfettered manner, and just accepting a convenient conclusion and looking no further. Your buddies fall squarely in the latter category.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Key point. If we were really interested in investigating actual crimes, the FBI would be concentrating on the known crimes, eg illegal unmasking of Trump campaign, the leaks, the Clinton slush fund/foundation, selling access and of course, the email scandal. Instead, dems/media want to push a fake narrative that Russia stole the election and that Trump is somehow compromised. If there were a shred of evidence, wouldn't it have come out by now?

You've already tried and convicted the Clintons several times over without a shred of concrete evidence despite all manner of investigations over a period of years. Yet you cannot understand how people are taking notice of all the smoke emanating from the Trump administration in all directions, and want those investigations to run their natural course.

Such a fair & balanced critter you are.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

What smoke? Zero evidence.

By contrast we know Hillary used an illegal server and transmitted numerous confidential docs to it as well as to anthony weiner. We know there were massive suspicious "donations" to her foundation as well as enormous sums paid to Bill while she was Sec. of State.

I'd also like to see the Iran deal investigated. The deal was so insanely one-sided, you have to wonder if there wasn't more to it than meets the eye.

The claims that Russia hacked the election have never been proved. All we have is the assurances of highly politicized intell officials, eg James Clapper, who was caught red-handed lying to congress about another sensitive topic, and John Brennan , a long time Saudi apologist and Obama retainer.

 

[exGOPer]

By contrast we know Hillary used an illegal server and transmitted numerous confidential docs to it as well as to anthony weiner. We know there were massive suspicious "donations" to her foundation as well as enormous sums paid to Bill while she was Sec. of State.

I'd also like to see the Iran deal investigated. The deal was so insanely one-sided, you have to wonder if there wasn't more to it than meets the eye.

The claims that Russia hacked the election have never been proved. All we have is the assurances of highly politicized intell officials, eg James Clapper, who was caught red-handed lying to congress about another sensitive topic, and John Brennan , a long time Saudi apologist and Obama retainer.

So why isn't the Trump DOJ doing anything about Hillary? All you guys including Trump do is whine whine whine even when you have full control

And by the way, Trump was bailed out twice by the Saudis and he has now approved a deal blocked by Obama - even fast tracking them

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/05/07/trump-fast-tracks-saudi-arms-sales/

 

[Tsing Tao]

There's also a difference between wanting the truth to be actively pursued in an unfettered manner, and just accepting a convenient conclusion and looking no further. Your buddies fall squarely in the latter category.

My "Buddies" as you call them can do whatever they would like. I don't concern myself with them and their lives. Feel free to have it out with them. My view, however, is that I've not accepted any conclusion, just that I am waiting for evidence to be presented. Until it is presented, I presume innocence, just like our justice system is designed to do.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

What smoke?

On an unrelated note: