Random Politics & Religion #24

So, basically what we got form this whole mess is:

1. Trump isn't a politician. Which is obvious.
2. Comey outed himself as a leaker. He purposefully leaked information to the press through a college professor colleague of his. In a time where it looks bad for anyone to leak anything to the press.
3. Comey outed Lynch about the Clinton email issue.
4. Lynch obstructed justice more than Trump did. Even then, it would be hard to prosecute Lynch for her role, but much harder to prosecute Trump over hoping. If hope is a criminal act, the Obama is a mobster for peddling hope for 8 years.
5. Trump did not obstruct any investigation. In fact, he was encouraging investigations on his own associates for any illegal acts. Comey's own testimony.
6. Big nothingburger for Trump. More evidence of collusion on the Obama Administration. Another Thursday in Washington DC.

Actually, you were inferring any illegal acts of "hoping" for something.

That question was already asked, and answered for you. I posted it well before you inferred your thoughts, so I quoted it again, since, obviously, you didn't see it the first time.

Yes, you were


It's not hard. You inputted your own opinion, you even went to say that "it's possible that what Trump did was illegal."

Therefor, you inferred that Trump committed illegal acts.

Or are you going to deny your own posts? Again?

Comey didn't decline. He stated "honest loyalty."

But that's a very simplistic viewpoint. For somebody inferring in seeing "the entire picture" you certainly have a narrow viewpoint....

Trump is the head of the executive branch of government. He has the authority to stop any investigation or trial or criminal sentence he wants. Furthermore, he can pardon anyone for anything even before an investigation concludes. He has that authority, its in the constitutional.

Trump doesn't need to infer his objectives by "hopeing" anything. Hes the *** president. Furthermore, congress doesnt need a real legal reason to impeach him eother, they can impeach him for jay-walking if they can get the votes for it.

As for Comey and loyalty, maybe Trump just didnt trust him. Seems like that was vindicated since Comey admitted to leaking his own memo.

/urge to go Grammar Nazi rising....

Next terrorist attack, I'm posting this:



Get gud, Islam.

That's not what you posted. So, denying your own posts then.

Wrong. All three times Trump asked for Comey's loyalty came from the one-on-one dinner on January 27th. That's straight from Comey's written statement.

Comey didn't state that he was loyal to the Constitution. Unless he made that statement today.

But certainly not in that written statement.

McCain is pretty much out of his mind by now. It's time to put him out to pasture.

If we took criminals at their words they would never commit crimes. Using the word "hope" doesn't necessarily protect Trump from obstructing justice. You have to admit the conversation itself felt like it came from an 1980s Mafia movie. Trump saying that he wants loyalty and then telling Comey that he "hopes" something will happen. Even you can see the intent there.

Anyway, it was pretty obvious how this thing was going to turn out people picked sides going in and only listened to questions from people playing on their team.

So, while some of your list is true, there are other parts that aren't and things you left out:

- Comey is positive, without a doubt, that the Russians are trying influence our politics. He even stated that this was not a matter of democrats or republicans but rather a matter of the nation. His wording here can lead us to believe that potentially both sides had some form of collusion and that either Option A or B would have been a "victory" for the Russians in this election. Obviously he did not go into detail about we can be assured that their meddling is something that needs an answer.

- Trump very clearly tried to get Comey's loyalty. Whether you want to admit it or not, the evidence is there. Comey was entirely honest throughout this hearing and this should be obvious as he did not pick a political bias when giving out information. He did withhold information because it was classified and that is well within his right.

You can call him a coward, a liar or really whatever you want but you wouldn't be accurately portraying his role today. In the comments about himself and others and his ability to recall situations to the precise wording you could tell that he was being honest. I did not see a man out for a revenge but a man who was concerned about the integrity of the organization he directed and concerned about the US. It took some courage to publicly testify not only were the US of congress and the press upon him but of our whole nation and of many other nations.

We knew that. We knew that coming into the election, and we knew that going out.

Do you blame him? I mean, really.

But again, Trump isn't a politician. That's proof of that.

You are right, and nobody here is calling him that.

I accused him of being a politician. Do you want to refute my accusation? Or are you going to agree with me?

Going to address just a couple items here:


Obstructing justice isn't some term that can be thrown around willy nilly. It's a legal term with specific requirements, and they are not met here.


Nothing illegal or even unprecedented here.

The mere fact that comey started taking notes during conversations with trump but neglected to do so with obama or anyone else is a clear indication of his anti-trump bias.

Like what planet do you live on?

Oh course trump wanted his loyalty and he was right to do so.. Comey was a leaker! He admitted to leaking his memo to the press. What else did he leak?

I'm sorry this is incorrect. The requirements could have been met:


Trump did not have to directly tell Comey what to do. He could use any means to convey his intent and there is a possibility that was his intent. Will you deny that? Whether or not Trump is a politician or not doesn't change the fact that his actions can be viewed as an intimidation or an endeavor to get Comey to stop an investigation.

He doesnt need to intimidate comey. He heads the executive branch he can stop the investigation by pardoning Flynn outright.

This is what liberals "hoped" Obama would have done to get the heat of clinton last fall.

This is a silly assessment. He did not feel the need to take notes with Obama or Bush and has not shown to operate under a political bias. If you have several bosses and they all seem normal to you and don't seem to cause issues are you going to take notes on their actions? When you get a new boss who is acting odd and doing things that are abnormal would you not take notes at that time?

Your conclusion here is faulty and is without much merit. You are attempting to prove something that was given to you as a narrative.


The fact isn't simply that Trump asked for his Loyalty it is more so how it plays into the context of the conversion. Also Trump should be aware that the FBI is loyal to the nation not necessarily the president. That is a silly thing to ask coming from the POTUS who should know full well how our government should operate. Loyalty of such nature is something like a monarch would ask for. That is aside the point. Trump asking for loyalty could have easily been used to drive him into the next part of his conversation in order to influence Comey's reaction. From Comey's testimony, intimidation is pretty clear.

I imagine if any other president asked for the FBI directors loyalty would get the same treatment.

Furthermore if the Trump demanding for loyalty wasn't a big deal why is Marc Kasowitz denying he said it? Even his lawyer understand the implications here.

I can view your actions right now as signaling your intent to murder me, thankfully no amount of "feelz" can make it so.

His lawyer is operating on some weird logical fallacies.

He stated that Comey lied in his testimony and that the testimony exonerates Trump.

If it exonerated him, did he really lie?
If he lied, can it truly exonerate him?

Again you shoot a hit and a miss. What do you think the public reaction would have been if Trump had pardoned Flynn or if Trump order the investigation to be stopped?

This actually takes us down the rabbit hole quite a bit more. Why would Trump want the Flynn investigation to end, but not by his hands? The answer is fairly obvious, at least to me.

Why do you think he would want Comey to end the investigation instead of ending it himself?

Hahahaha, that's rich. Trump says "I hope", and you're going out of your way to keep the hope alive on the flimsiest accusation in the history of obstruction claims that even Comey can't justify and he was there.

That is a stretch in logic and you know it. I don't think Comey's testimony was ridiculous as this example. If the conversation happened the way Comey said it did then there is significant reason to believe that Trump was attempting to intimidate.



Reminds of that Puzzle where one guys always lies and the other always tells the truth. I think there was a Yugioh episode with that puzzle too.

I think most people attempting to defend Trump(potentially not on this forum) are operating under that same premise. If you think Comey is lying about what he said about Trump then who is to say that he was telling the truth about questions geared towards Clinton? In the words of a great man : "Kind of seems like a double standard here"

Aren't you going out of your way to prove that Trump couldn't have been intimidating him? Why are we even use the word "hope" as the operative here. Actions speak louder than words and context speaks louder than a single word. You truly believe, given only Comey's testimony, that Trump did not /potentially/ try to influence Comey's actions in regards to the investigation?

Keep in mind too, I'm not saying it with certainty but rather accepting the possibility.

Haha the leftists on here losing their collective minds now. Nothing they thought would happen actually did, all the *** they've made up is turning out to be precisely that, ***. Now they gotta twist their past statements past the brink of credulity and into the realm of abstract art.

Some 1984 level ***happening here.

Since when is the president allowed to just stop an investigation? Lol

Apparently republicans try to say that Obama is a dictator is that bad but they are ok with Trump acting like one.

Yet he stated during the testimony that Lynch pressured him to influence the narrative on the Clinton email scandal which he stated made him ill yet still complied.

Are we at bias yet? Or should i go on?



Maybe IF Trump asked for his loyalty it had something to do with trying to deal woth the massive leaking that has surrounded his campaign.