Trump has concealed details of his face-to-face encounters with Putin from senior officials in admin

[NeverTrump]

Wow, how short is your memory:

Oh so you can question the President!!!!!!!!!! I remember now. I just forgot because you refused to look at my questions...

 

[GDViking]

Oh, and by the way, this guy who's making decisions for the entire country, and who is credibly suspected of working in the interests of a hostile foreign government? Just a reminder that he shut down the Federal government, leading to an ever increasing level of chaos every day.

Yip just ask yourself what a Russian asset would do and you can predict accurately what trumps actions will be...

 

[jghiretire]

Innocent until proven guilty means nothing to Trump resisters but it's obvious that they believe that they have the unmitigated gall to question what is said in his meetings with other world leaders. Too funny.

You still want another investigation on Hillary. She's guilty no matter what. Yeah you're hilarious.

 

[jghiretire]

No, if I am a "Patriotic American" I DON"T have to wonder. :roll:

The only people who would wonder are those who have always believed he was a "Russian stooge" who only got elected thanks to Russian help.

IMO your side of the argument was so shocked by the results of the 2016 election (even you "nevertrump" sorts who did not vote for him) that you sought any excuse to explain it other than he simply campaigned for electoral college votes and won. According to the MSN and all talking head pundits, it was such an impossible result that in the minds of people like yourself it just HAD to be a "cheat."

So from day one it's been issue after issue, allegation after allegation, a complete and total moral panic witch-hunt.

Fine, except I followed the campaign closely, I saw the misinformation and disinformation coupled with very few "facts" (like the grab then by the...), but also the major turnout at almost every one of his in-person rallies. I pointed this out in this very Forum, and that it showed he had more support than polls indicated, at least in the Red States and as proven in some of the "Blue Wall" States hit hardest by those Democrat economic policies and trade agreements.

As a patriotic American I presume my President is NOT a "Siberian Candidate," and I certainly won't change merely because naysayers like yourself expect otherwise.

Did you never hear the Access Hollywood tape?? That wasn't exactly misinformation. Apparently you didn't watch the campaign closely enough.

 

[SkyFox76]

And if he doesn't do it. Will you vote for him again? or will you vote for a known liar?

My support of him at this point has hit an all time low, so even if he were to parade it around the WH on a stagecoach, no, he'll not being getting anymore votes from me.

 

[Mr Person]

Well, my point is that just because YOU and others consider it "abhorrent," that may be simply because of the particular individual and the allegations he is a "Siberian Candidate."

I asked a simple question, and if the answer is "NO, there is no requirement," then much like the demand to reveal one's tax returns it has little meaning except to claim some moral high ground.
IMO (whataboutism about to pop up) Obama was not expecting to be overheard when he promised the Russian representative he would have more leeway when he was reelected.

We simply do not know for certain if other Presidents have not done the very same thing with other world leaders.

No, you didn't ask a simple question. You did the usual Captain Adverse routine: cloak misdirection in the kind of language you once decided sounds objective, in the usual bid to try to bootstrap your post into credibility. :shrug:

It's little substance was basic goal-post moving. The OP doesn't allege that Trump violated a criminal statute, therefore, you demanded to know if he violated a criminal statute. That then shifts the subject from whether it is suspect that a President already under investigation in regards to Russia, where Russia already did interfere in our elections in a bid to help him....

...over to whether or not he could be indicted. That would make the "intellectual" in "intellectually dishonest" blush.




But hey, you went to great pains to write an essay on why you are going to use "whattaboutisms" despite blaming exclusively the left for their existence and decrying their alleged use of it. No doubt this is OK for you, too. :coffeepap:

 

[Threegoofs]

Wow. He was asked by ‘Judge’ Jeanine about it directly... and literally issued a non-denial denial.

WTF is wrong with this guy?

PIRRO: "Are you now or have you ever worked for Russia, Mr. President?"

TRUMP: "I think it’s the most insulting thing I’ve ever been asked... If you read the article, you’ll find they had nothing... It’s called the failing New York Times for a reason..." (then pivots to Comey)

 

[Parrish]

Why did he take the notes from the linguists who were present?

 

[markjs]

Why did he take the notes from the linguists who were present?

And that IS illegal, all presidential communications and writings must be archived.

 

[Parrish]

And that IS illegal, all presidential communications and writings must be archived.

Yep. And so are Loyalty Oaths and NDA's.

 

[markjs]

Yep. And so are Loyalty Oaths and NDA's.

Well, we KNOW 99.5% of his base does not give **** one about ANY crimes Trump committed, only that he goets away with it. When you argue withchhunt and technicalities, it's cuz they have you. But any law he broke it's OK cuz....

Barack HUSSEIN(!!!) Obama and the CLINTONS!!!!!! That's why! Only dumm libruls of the "Democrat" party (communists)! I mean the logic here is FLAWLESS right?:roll:

Oh wait, I should have capitalized and used more large fonts and exclaimies for credibility, cuz ALL smart 'muricans see how credibler that makes ya. God damm dumm libruls should get som boook a learnin'! Loser libtards!

Wow, I am a MASTER at the Trump argument, and I don't even agree. HOw dumb is that?

 

[joko104]

If this were a rational country, Trump's executive powers would be suspended until full investigations into his relations with Russia were completed. That he's still making decisions for the most powerful country on earth stretches credulity to its breaking point.

If this were a rational country it would not trash the reputation of it's chief executive and commander and chief declaring partisan gossip are truisms before any investigation - and in all civilized countries there is never a presumption of guilty - a concept the Democratic Party wants to eliminate.

 

[joko104]

So NOW the complaint of the leftwing anti-Trump haters is they are furious that he keeps national security secrets rather than announcing secrets to the entire world and all our adversaries as was Hilary Clinton's practice.

 

[joko104]

Well, we KNOW 99.5% of his base does not give **** one about ANY crimes Trump committed, only that he goets away with it. When you argue withchhunt and technicalities, it's cuz they have you. But any law he broke it's OK cuz....

Barack HUSSEIN(!!!) Obama and the CLINTONS!!!!!! That's why! Only dumm libruls of the "Democrat" party (communists)! I mean the logic here is FLAWLESS right?:roll:

Oh wait, I should have capitalized and used more large fonts and exclaimies for credibility, cuz ALL smart 'muricans see how credibler that makes ya. God damm dumm libruls should get som boook a learnin'! Loser libtards!

Wow, I am a MASTER at the Trump argument, and I don't even agree. HOw dumb is that?

I would suggest using spell check.

What we know is the majority of Trump haters don't care about facts or proof. The only question is how many attacks against Trump is it possible to concoct and create out of thin air.

 

[beefheart]

If this were a rational country, Trump's executive powers would be suspended until full investigations into his relations with Russia were completed. That he's still making decisions for the most powerful country on earth stretches credulity to its breaking point.

The rubes are not rational. They are angry morons

 

[Anthony60]

If this were a rational country, Trump's executive powers would be suspended until full investigations into his relations with Russia were completed. That he's still making decisions for the most powerful country on earth stretches credulity to its breaking point.

That would be a country that has gone off the Marxist deep end.

 

[Mustachio]

One question. Is there any law or regulation regarding this process which REQUIRES the President to do otherwise, or is this just something people would prefer the President do?

Do you mean is there any law or regulation that we have a President who isn't compromised by Putin and committed treason and multiple felonies? I guess most people would just prefer our President isn't guilty of misdemeanors, felonies, and treason. Just one of those pesky small-print kind of things attached to the job. But some people - not most - but some are smart enough to know that the ends (treason for the sake of obtaining and abusing power) justify the means (treason).

 

[sangha]

One question. Is there any law or regulation regarding this process which REQUIRES the President to do otherwise, or is this just something people would prefer the President do?

What reasons would explain why he would do this?

The president has the legal authority to launch nuclear missile at Texas. I do not think there is anyone who would suggest that would be a good thing to do.

 

[sangha]

Well, my point is that just because YOU and others consider it "abhorrent," that may be simply because of the particular individual and the allegations he is a "Siberian Candidate."

I asked a simple question, and if the answer is "NO, there is no requirement," then much like the demand to reveal one's tax returns it has little meaning except to claim some moral high ground. :shrug:

IMO (whataboutism about to pop up) Obama was not expecting to be overheard when he promised the Russian representative he would have more leeway when he was reelected.

We simply do not know for certain if other Presidents have not done the very same thing with other world leaders. :coffeepap:

Obama said that into an open mic in a room with dozens of people present, including many reporters. He would know that his interpreter would hear the remarks and never took any action to withold that from the other members of his administration

 

[sangha]

No.

I've been in this Forum long enough for people to know where I stand when it comes to alleging someone has done something wrong absent proof of guilt. Especially when it is all naked speculation.

Innocent until proven guilty is my motto.

I asked the original question because if there is no law/regulation preventing it and other President's may have done the same, then decrying Trump when he does it is hypocritical.

Nor is it automatically damning evidence except to those who DO think he was a Siberian Candidate.

Now ask me how I feel or what I believe AFTER Mueller makes his report and I can examine FACTS used and see what crimes are alleged.

Until then, as far as I am concerned Mr. Trump can have all the secret or public meeting he wants while serving as President, because I don't currently believe he is a "criminal, traitor, or spy."

No other president has done the same.

My overarching point was that Presidents operate in many areas bereft of statute, by the nature of their office. It then becomes Congress' job to reign him in. That has not happened.

Your last statement is an interesting one though, and has some validity in my opinion. The problem I and others have with Trump is his kowtowing to Putin, and his taking positions against the U.S. government. And for that, we can not, and do not, trust him. Not at all.

No, not really because no other president has done the same. They have not ordered their interpreters to withold their notes from our own intelligence agents and other administration officers.

 

[Greenbeard]

Wow. He was asked by ‘Judge’ Jeanine about it directly... and literally issued a non-denial denial.

WTF is wrong with this guy?

Filibustering with phony indignation instead of just saying no (which he never did) is telling.

 

[Fletch]

Do you mean is there any law or regulation that we have a President who isn't compromised by Putin and committed treason and multiple felonies? I guess most people would just prefer our President isn't guilty of misdemeanors, felonies, and treason. Just one of those pesky small-print kind of things attached to the job. But some people - not most - but some are smart enough to know that the ends (treason for the sake of obtaining and abusing power) justify the means (treason).

The president isnt guilty of any of that so you can spare us your Russian Trutherism.

 

[Captain Adverse]

What reasons would explain why he would do this?

The president has the legal authority to launch nuclear missile at Texas. I do not think there is anyone who would suggest that would be a good thing to do.

1. I don't need to speculate on his reasons, he is the President and there is nothing that prevents him from doing this.

2. No, he does not have the "legal authority to launch a nuclear missile at Texas." There are steps required before the President can launch a nuclear strike absent evidence of a first strike from an enemy nuclear power. Targeting a location within the USA on a whim? :doh Ridiculous argumentum absurdum.

Obama said that into an open mic in a room with dozens of people present, including many reporters. He would know that his interpreter would hear the remarks and never took any action to withold that from the other members of his administration

You are assuming that he was aware he was still on a live open mike. Meanwhile, then President Medvedev spoke English himself and needed no translation. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-more-flexibility-russia/

No other president has done the same.

No, not really because no other president has done the same. They have not ordered their interpreters to withold their notes from our own intelligence agents and other administration officers.

That is a bold, and unsupported assertion. It needs a citation please.

 

[Deuce]

If this were a rational country it would not trash the reputation of it's chief executive and commander and chief declaring partisan gossip are truisms before any investigation - and in all civilized countries there is never a presumption of guilty - a concept the Democratic Party wants to eliminate.

Before any investigations :lamo

 

[Cardinal]

Before any investigations :lamo

I can only assume that Joko's tivo malfunctioned his entire life, causing him to consistently watch the first and second half of Law and Order out of sequence.