opelmanta1900
6 years ago

Well ... it took a whistle blower to show one instance of hiding rough call notes on a secretive server rather than the norm, and there is a refusal to turn over any documents or allow his peeps to testify. So we are seeing a narrow swath of one issue that we didn't until just recently and still are not seeing anything. And all that had to happen with pressure. Not exactly transparent no matter how many times he tells you that and how bad you want to believe it.

so you can buy the hides nothing crap along with the Brooklyn bridge all you want. I'll rent it from you once in possession.

teedubbya wrote:


Not a whistle blower, a traitor.... Someone guilty of espionage... Had someone released the confidential details of Obama's conversations with Iran, they would've been the same...
teedubbya
6 years ago

Not a whistle blower, a traitor.... Someone guilty of espionage... Had someone released the confidential details of Obama's conversations with Iran, they would've been the same...

opelmanta1900 wrote:




We have whistleblower laws for a reason and they apparently were followed (according to the trump appointed IG, Grassley etc.). Had they followed the same process in any admin it would be the same. They didn't release anything. They followed the rules. This is nonsense.


I don't envy you trying to defend the indefensible and it will crumble if not in the near future, in the long run. I understand a little of the reason why you feel compelled to defend such things, but not to the extent you are.
opelmanta1900
6 years ago
Never in the history of America have we had a liberal media so hell bent on bringing down a president and dividing our nation... Never...

Since before his election, the left has made clear it's plans... You're fooling yourself if you don't understand that a traitor could've listened into Obama's conversations with Iran and justifiably reported it via whistleblower channels... And we could've had drawn out impeachment hearings and pre hearings and Obama would've never testified without counsel and the media would've justified it...

But that didn't happen... There was no media to dissect every single smell that came out of the presidents ass... That's new to this president...

Maybe if the press has been less open about their intentions to take down this president at any cost before he'd even been inaugurated they would be more believable...
teedubbya
6 years ago
back to the media huh.... maybe its worth really looking at the prez....
opelmanta1900
6 years ago
Are you denying it? Blind to it?

If Victor hated you, always hated you, hated you to death, then guess what happens when Victor comes to me and tells me bad things about you?

I will never listen to Victor when it comes to subjects concerning you... Never... Never ever ever ever ever ever ever...

Got that? Not ever... He is not to be trusted in any way when it comes to things he says about you... Hate blinds a man to honesty so even if he has proof that you're a bad man, I will never trust that proof in his hands... Never...
victor809
6 years ago
I don't think the media hates trump. I'm pretty sure they love him. They love the clicks... the follows... the $$

I mean... I hate TW. But I think you're wrong about the media.
opelmanta1900
6 years ago

I don't think the media hates trump. I'm pretty sure they love him. They love the clicks... the follows... the $$

I mean... I hate TW. But I think you're wrong about the media.

victor809 wrote:


I do kinda believe that thing you told me about his superfluous second anus...
victor809
6 years ago

I do kinda believe that thing you told me about his superfluous second anus...

opelmanta1900 wrote:



You can't beleive me. even if it's true.
teedubbya
6 years ago
never said I do or don't believe it. it just isn't an excuse or smokescreen for wrong doing.

the anus thing that is
opelmanta1900
6 years ago
I was hoping you were gonna say "that's my mouth, you ******"...
teedubbya
6 years ago
I was saving that for my letter to the queen
opelmanta1900
6 years ago
For what it's worth, here's your whistleblowing traitor with his own explanation for why i don't believe him:

President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.

It’s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump’s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.

The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.


I would know. I am one of them.

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.


Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.

Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.

But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.


From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.

Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.

“There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.


It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.

The result is a two-track presidency.

Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.

Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.

On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.


This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.

Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.

The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.

Senator John McCain put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.
victor809
6 years ago

I was saving that for my letter to the queen

teedubbya wrote:



You write personal letters to drafter?
opelmanta1900
6 years ago

I was saving that for my letter to the queen

teedubbya wrote:


😂

be'er not talk to her majusty like that! [ram27bat]
opelmanta1900
6 years ago

You write personal letters to drafter?

victor809 wrote:


😂 I knew this would eventually turn humorous...
teedubbya
6 years ago
I'd like the source of your info on the whistle blower....


but would also point out all they do is point out the concern to the appropriate people who act or don't act on it after taking a looksie. The Inspector General took a look and called it credible. Its a distraction.
opelmanta1900
6 years ago

I'd like the source of your info on the whistle blower....


but would also point out all they do is point out the concern to the appropriate people who act or don't act on it after taking a looksie. The Inspector General took a look and called it credible. Its a distraction.

teedubbya wrote:


NY Times
frankj1
6 years ago
appears to have been written before the mid-term elections.
so how did the NY Times know that he/she (writer of the above) would be a whistle blower later, AFTER the call with Ukraine this Summer?
opelmanta1900
6 years ago
Because he literally wrote a long unsigned letter promising to do everything he could to violate the will of the people by interfering with the president...

We all knew he'd blow something eventually....
victor809
6 years ago
... why do you think there's only one person trying to keep the government running despite this administration?
Users browsing this topic