Comey: Trump Campaign officially under investigation by the FBI

[NYC17]

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/843...655360/video/1 - Interesting development.

What's interesting about it?

[rogueMatthias]

There's people in this thread that'd deny anything shady between Trump and Russia even if Trump himself admitted it. I mean that can't be true, he must've been forced to say it.

Blind political loyalty.

I think the biggest problem people have believing Russias impact on the election is because whatever their great "mastermind plan" was, or however much Trump and Putin were colluding - none of it would have made a damned bit of difference if Clinton had ran even a moderately good campaign, or if she hadn't ostracised huge amounts of voters herself.

If it's true then it's almost hilarious how bad a job they did to help Trumps campaign. Even Comey himself did FAR MORE to damage Clintons campaign than any Russian hacking possibly would or could have done.

[Matchles]

Only one had campaign questions handed to them with prepared answers ready. I would call that pretty disingenuous.

Oh for fuck's sake. As if the Clinton campaign wouldn't know that a debate in Michigan would include a question about Flint's water. Would've been totally blindsided if it wasn't offered up without any solicitation from the Clinton camp.

[LaserSharkDFB]

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/843...655360/video/1 - Interesting development.

Not really. Nobody was really saying that the actual voting process was interfered with. That's been a red herring since the beginning.

[Kujako]

What's interesting about it?

That Trump is aware of CSPAN? Who'd a thunk it?

[Gurluas]

Hillary's Russia politics was basically: Fight them, if need be go to war.

If I was Russia I'd also try to influence the election.

[PACOX]

It's funny that some say this is a waste of time and those people tend to Donnie supporters. But none of the hearings would have to take place if Donnie had just listened when multiple agencies at multiple levels said there was no wiretapping and such an incident would have taken all 3 branches to approve.

Instead of crying about the Russian ties he (Donnie) should be cleaning house, conducting his own internal investigation to weed out all the compromised officials. OR his either extremely incompetent or was complacent. No pass (and perhaps future) President would idly sit back and yell conspiracy when his administration has clearly been compromised. They would start going through their staff and firing suspect individuals without hesitation before Congressional committees even had to step in. Sad.

One other thing. I like how Donnie only cares about leakers when the information is against him. Podesta, he loved it. He encouraged Russian hackers to release Clinton emails. He cited vault 7 in his wiretapping claims. His entire wiretapping suspensions relied on th supposed existence of leaked classified information about the taps. The man is a mess.

[Matchles]

Hillary's Russia politics was basically: Fight them, if need be go to war.

If I was Russia I'd also try to influence the election.

No one says Russia isn't acting in their own self-interest. Does that mean we shouldn't be pissed about it?

[zenkai]

We know, zenkai. We know.

Oh, but to address the actual numbers:
-snip the bullshit-

selecting things to fact check vs everything that person has ever stated is not the same thing. I can select post of yours that are full of shit and say you lie 100% of the time.

[NYC17]

That Trump is aware of CSPAN? Who'd a thunk it?

Defund it! The Pentagon needs a golf course for training purposes!

[Daelak]

Hillary's Russia politics was basically: Fight them, if need be go to war.

If I was Russia I'd also try to influence the election.

The west has been 'fighting' the actions of Russia for decades, they are our adversary, not potential ally.

[Paranoid Android]

Oh for fuck's sake. As if the Clinton campaign wouldn't know that a debate in Michigan would include a question about Flint's water. Would've been totally blindsided if it wasn't offered up without any solicitation from the Clinton camp.

I love it. That one debate question given TOTALLY turned the primary to Clinton and the reason Bernie loss. Now as far as shady shit done by Brazille and again showing that DNC looks out for its own. Sure.

The biggest reason I hate CNN with a passion is all they do is hire pundits from both sides. Then they let the both say their shit and expect the other side to prove that they are wrong. Dumbest way to do shit. If you fanboi of either one you will not believe the other side or if you are actually coming their to try information you just see the two sides telling totally different stories. Brazille was now the worst example. Clearly putting her party politics ahead of her CNN job.

[Allybeboba]

Oh for fuck's sake. As if the Clinton campaign wouldn't know that a debate in Michigan would include a question about Flint's water. Would've been totally blindsided if it wasn't offered up without any solicitation from the Clinton camp.

Those are the ones that were proven. There is no telling how many more were fed that we don't know about.
Remember, Wikileaks has never ever been proven to be wrong. Ever...

[LaserSharkDFB]

selecting things to fact check vs everything that person has ever stated is not the same thing. I can select post of yours that are full of shit and say you lie 100% of the time.

Every day, PolitiFact and PunditFact staffers look for statements that can be checked. We comb through speeches, news stories, press releases, campaign brochures, TV ads, Facebook postings and transcripts of TV and radio interviews. Because we can't possibly check all claims, we select the most newsworthy and significant ones.

In deciding which statements to check, we ask ourselves these questions:

Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable? We don’t check opinions, and we recognize that in the world of speechmaking and political rhetoric, there is license for hyperbole.

Is the statement leaving a particular impression that may be misleading?

Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas" on claims that obviously represent a slip of the tongue.

Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?

Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder: Is that true?

If your defense is 'well they don't check every single thing he says so that doesn't count', then grow up. Politifact checks their meaningful public statements that aren't clearly true or clearly hyperbole.

[LaserSharkDFB]

"independent" fact-checking site......HAHAHAHA.

Please point us to the fact-checking site you use, then. Funny how there isn't one that tends to show Republicans in a good light, isn't it? Almost as if they're afraid of facts.

[Deleted]

That you don't find the potential collusion at least somewhat troubling is what is truly terrifying.

I find actual collusion to be "terrifying". I don't find POTENTIAL anything to be terrifying.

I will wait for the actual investigation to be concluded.

[Paranoid Android]

Care to address anything on politfact that you think is wrong? If you have other evidence, would love to see it.

Naw. Just easier to cry Fake News or dismiss it. That way you don't have to debate facts and just say "Na na na, boo boo". I saw this coming when we had the Mega Election Threads and all sudden PolitiFact become unreliable. Ironic that other news sites get linked and Trump is credible.

[zmp]

This is going to be good either way. Trump gets caught fraternizing with the enemy. The right continues to pledge allegiance to The Donald....grab your popcorn.

Investigation comes up with nada. Liberal tears flow for weeks....grab your popcorn.

It's a win-win!

Indeed It sure is going to be exciting.

[Matchles]

"independent" fact-checking site......HAHAHAHA.

How are they not independent? You may want to be careful in how you choose to answer this because in full disclosure, I personally know some of the people behind the creation of politifact (family connections to Florida politics).

[Matchles]

Those are the ones that were proven. There is no telling how many more were fed that we don't know about.
Remember, Wikileaks has never ever been proven to be wrong. Ever...

That is a symptom of the intelligence community and government refusing to confirm or deny leaked information. That doesn't mean Wikileaks isn't wrong, but if those subject to the leaks come out and show what is wrong, it lends credibility to everything else that isn't addressed.