FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe stepping dow

[Felya]

A lot of it is also based on made-up numbers, like 25 million jobs, The Wall costing under $8 billion, 42% unemployment, millions of illegal votes, $1 trillion of free infrastructure, and pretty much anything he said where he got the best/highest despite objective evidence that he didn't.

His policy was that he wasn’t Hillary. I don’t know why @Dacien and his ilk pretend it was something else.

[Stormspellz]

We should be looking at his policy, not his loud talk or tweets or leaked conversations.

he rubber stamped a scotus position he shouldn't of had and a tax bill thats disastrous long term and EOs that either screw over none rich people or a middle finger to anything with Obama attached to it.

China is in a position to become teh world economic super power, with his abandonment of the TPP, he has left our EU allies unsure of our future support to the point they are making their own trade/military alliances, a twitter dick waving contest over who's "big red button" is bigger and spent a lot of tax payer money at his own business with his 100+ days of golfing.

Holy accomplishments! That doesn't even go into the internal damage his appointments are doing to their respective agencies or anything Russian related.

[Mormolyce]

I would say a former Obama Adviser who was appointed to the team 10 days after the election in 2008 would be a credible source for how the timeline went. And we can verify these facts if we were to dig deep enough. I haven't done so, but are you suggesting Axelrod is lying for some reason to cover for Trump in November of 2016? And that nobody bothered to call him on it?



They're not minor, they paint a broader picture from the get-go of a failure president, a malicious president, on through the months, in order to malign him and hurt him politically. As I've said before, there's plenty to actually nail Trump for, so to see this kind of journalistic dishonesty only irks me more.

And once more, using future information to validate attacks on Trump in the past where that information wasn't available is just not accurate. They either had the information then to make the claims or they didn't. You can't say "we know now" that it was accurate when the ones attacking Trump's transition at the time had no access to that information.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I said that even if Axelrod was correct, the argument is irrelevant since the Trump administration is demonstrably lagging far behind on his appointments.

And your original contention was that it was fake news to say that the Trump Administration was in disarray, a fact that has been confirmed from numerous sources inside and outside the White House for over a year now. That is a laughable assertion.

The media was right to draw attention to these issues and their thesis was absolutely borne out, your paltry equivocations are nothing but a reflection of how detatched from reality you've decided to become.

- - - Updated - - -

I'd say "enjoy your 8 years" but the mod gestapo would come and fracture me for that. Your equally stupid post will be ignored though, so you can relax.

Oh yeah, the mods are totally the gestapo, all out to get you aren't they?

Oh wait, you're flagrantly trolling in violation of the site rules, so no.

[Kiri]

Okay, so let's just accept every bad story as truth, no verification needed. That's how we're supposed to operate?

I'm not going to condemn a remark that one side of the story claims never happened. But assuming it did, I condemn it.



I just happen to think a nasty remark to McCabe is multitudes less important than his actual policy. That's just how I feel.

Nah, we should not. But on the other hand, I have never seen you say 'but XY denies it' regarding any claim made by Trump/the WH. That makes you look as if you, in a vacuum, trust them more. Again, I am just telling you how stuff looks.

But yeah, the point is that it is multitudes less important to you in particular and that it can only serve to derail the thread. There are a lot of Americans who have the highest amount of respect for the office of the president and feel that Trump is disgracing it by acting like a CEO. Or those who fear that he is trying to subvert the values of the US democracy by acting like an emperor.
Actual policy is important. But a president 'standing up to the people' instead of 'for the people', a president who clearly only considers to have a responsibility to his voters, if any, is also an important issue. If we are discussing these things and you needlessly bring up policy, it only looks like a shield. Just like when you say you only voted for him due to policy issues. 'I don't care about everything else outside of Israel policy, tax cuts etc' is a shield you prop up to deflect criticism and responsibility. It is the same shield that those who support autocracies use. Heck, there are likely quite a few North Koreans who go 'I don't care about anything else, as long as KJU's policies benefit me'.

[Flarelaine]

I think its cute how right wingers think if they just claim shit boldly enough and in all caps with vaguely threatening tone that it'll all just come true.

Whatever man hears often enough will sink in. Sad, but a fact about the working of the human mind.

[DarkTZeratul]

Getting back on topic, McCabe being forced out seems like it's probably a bad thing.

Christopher Wray named David Bowditch as McCabe's replacement, though, which means McCabe's departure is really only a bad thing for Donald Trump. The guy's basically cut from the same cloth as Mueller when it comes to a commitment to law and order.

[Machismo]

This again puts me on the spot of parsing what exactly he said in that tape, and therefore "defending" those remarks, and that puts me in a vulnerable position, especially around here. I can describe what was actually said and what has actually shown to have happened, but it puts me in a weird spot that I don't care for. I don't like his comments about his daughters, nobody does, but was it a bad joke? Was it bragging about his daughter's attractiveness? Is he a weird incestuous pervert? Is any of this relevant to his ability to enact positive policy for the United States? These are questions for each individual to answer.

Same goes for bragging to Billy Bush, or any of the other allegations.

I said it before, if I thought Trump was a sexual predator, I wouldn't have voted for him.

So, where exactly is that line? You've made it clear that bragging about being a sexual predator, barging in on teenage girls when they are naked, constant lies, being a racist, and sexualizing his own daughters is not enough to get you to stop supporting you? That's the entire point, you have a vested interest, both politically and mentally, to defend the guy and justify his actions. As for me, My bias is significantly smaller, as it's not as if I actually wanted his opponent to win. I probably hate Hillary Clinton even more than I hate him.

Once again, it simply demonstrates that you sacrificed your morals and principles in voting for him.

[Deleted]

Not true at all. All you had to do was not vote for Trump. Plenty of principled conservatives didn't, and either chose a third party candidate or wrote in a candidate.

But they diden´t vote for Hillary did they? And now Trumps in office.

Im with @Dacien on this, means you indirectly helped him win by not voting for Hillary.

Bolded the wrong part here

- - - Updated - - -

"Just because I supported Trump, doesn't mean I supported Trump."

-Dacien 2018-

You don´t have to support his behaviour for supporting strict immigration and his Tax plan?

[Machismo]

But they diden´t vote for Hillary did they? And now Trumps in office.

Im with @Dacien on this, means you indirectly helped him win by not voting for Hillary.

Bolded the wrong part here

- - - Updated - - -



You don´t have to support his behaviour for supporting strict immigration and his Tax plan?

If you voted for him, you support all of it, that's the point. It's an attempt to deny responsibility, and it's utter cowardice.

[Felya]

You don´t have to support his behaviour for supporting strict immigration and his Tax plan?

You don’t have to support him, when you support him on his tax and immigration policy? What?

[Dacien]

You don´t have to support his behaviour for supporting strict immigration and his Tax plan?

Right!?

But about McCabe,
A new book seems to suggest McCabe set up the administration.

McCabe claimed to want Priebus to know the FBI’s perspective that this story was not true. Priebus pointed to the televisions that were going non-stop on the story. He asked if the FBI could say publicly what he had just told him. McCabe said he’d have to check, according to the book. McCabe reportedly called back and said he couldn’t do anything about it.

Now, a week later, CNN was airing a breaking news story naming Priebus. According to ‘multiple U.S. officials,’ the network said, ‘the FBI rejected a White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump’s associates and Russians known to U.S. intelligence.’

Priebus was stunned by the implication that he was pressuring law enforcement. Had he been set up? Why was the FBI leaking this information when one of its top officials had initiated the conversation?

[PosPosPos]

Right!?

Yet you still feel obliged to make up all sorts of petty excuses everytime Trump makes a boo boo on the world stage.

In non-alternative reality, that would be classic apologism - which is supporting Trump's behavior.

Also, lol thefederalist.com, the cesspool of pedophiles and racist sociopaths. Source fitting for someone like yourself, I guess.

[Ripster42]

Right!?

But about McCabe,
A new book seems to suggest McCabe set up the administration.

I keep trying to read the first sentence of your quote. That writer needs an editor. I had to read the actual story to get that he was saying the FBI didn't think the story was true and not that he didn't think the FBI's perspective on the story was true. And Kurtz, he's they guy who had to leave the daily beast for making false accusatory statements and being "serially inaccurate?" So we should totally believe his accusations here.

Edit: and just to be clear, making false accusatory statements to push an anti-gay agenda and defame a gay NBA player who came out of the closet. In other words, he lies to push his agenda.

[Breccia]

So we should totally believe his accusations here.

It fits the narrative. Not the facts so much.

[Blade Wolf]

Well he's saying that some are good people, and that some are rapists and murderers. Is that the worst possible way to put it? Yes, yes it is. Is a better way to put it, "Mexican immigrants come here to work hard and have a better life, but some are committing crimes that we need to address"? Yes, it sure is. Do I think the latter is what he's getting at in his typical horribly-communicated way? I do, NYC. I do. I think he's a bombastic character with policy much more reasonable. Look at his DREAMer proposal, far beyond what many thought was on the table. When the rubber meets the road, his talk is one thing, his policy is quite another, and that's been my point all along.

We should be looking at his policy, not his loud talk or tweets or leaked conversations.

Which policy should we look at? The campaign trail, when he got elected, post election? His policies are all over the place because he has no idea.

[Deleted]

You don’t have to support him, when you support him on his tax and immigration policy? What?

His Behaviour i don´t need to support. Now i don´t support anyting he does, but if i like his tax plan, do i need to support his juvenile behviour at the same time? No you don´t

Is that more clear?

- - - Updated - - -

If you voted for him, you support all of it, that's the point. It's an attempt to deny responsibility, and it's utter cowardice.

Then i guess you and @Dacien statements that if you did not vote or voted for a 3d party candidate, you indirectly hold a responsibility for the mess that is Trump.

- - - Updated - - -

Right!?

But about McCabe,
A new book seems to suggest McCabe set up the administration.

Yeah, i don´t get what the fuss is about.

[Felya]

His Behaviour i don´t need to support. Now i don´t support anyting he does, but if i like his tax plan, do i need to support his juvenile behviour at the same time? No you don´t

Is that more clear?

No, it doesn’t. What do you think his behavior is in reaction to, if not questioning things like the tax plan? You have a reason he is not stating? If you think it is a good idea to invest in coal, what reason do you have if not Trump’s attacks on clean energy?

[Orbitus]

Right!?

But about McCabe,
A new book seems to suggest McCabe set up the administration.

The fact that they followed through with it, is the problem. Even if they were set up to do it. Which is why the Federalist isn't very reliable. The fact that he followed through with it, without reporting anything, even after being warned, is part of the problem.

[Machismo]

His Behaviour i don´t need to support. Now i don´t support anyting he does, but if i like his tax plan, do i need to support his juvenile behviour at the same time? No you don´t

Is that more clear?

- - - Updated - - -



Then i guess you and @Dacien statements that if you did not vote or voted for a 3d party candidate, you indirectly hold a responsibility for the mess that is Trump.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah, i don´t get what the fuss is about.

Luckily, I did vote for a third party, and it means I supported that candidate... warts and all. Choosing not to vote would have also been a way to not support either of the main candidates.

[Mormolyce]

Then i guess you and @Dacien statements that if you did not vote or voted for a 3d party candidate, you indirectly hold a responsibility for the mess that is Trump.

More accurately, the United States collectively is to blame for failing to use a voting system that avoids vote splitting.

- - - Updated - - -

Well he's saying that some are good people, and that some are rapists and murderers. Is that the worst possible way to put it? Yes, yes it is. Is a better way to put it, "Mexican immigrants come here to work hard and have a better life, but some are committing crimes that we need to address"? Yes, it sure is. Do I think the latter is what he's getting at in his typical horribly-communicated way? I do, NYC. I do.

Do you need to address them? Immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than the population at large. So why are they being singled out? Seems like you "need to address" the criminality of natural born Americans.

It is no "miscommunication". It's a deliberate lie that's being pushed to entice bigots.