Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
The Sandbox - AustinThe Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here. If it's NOT an adult-themed topic, then it belongs here
Comey testified under oath to Congress that no one pressured the FBI to drop the Flynn investigation. Maybe the reason Comey didn't show anyone this memo is because he didn't want to be charged with perjury.
Trump's latest tweets about "witch hunt" make him appear to be guilty of something. For someone so concerned with appearance, the guy is not acting very smart...
We don't know the answers yet, but, with every action and every tweet, Trump is making it seem like a cover-up.
Lol... you're using the same argument I just used against Susan Rice. She has lied, reversed herself, and now won't testify about her unmasking activities. Her every action and statement makes it look like a cover-up.
I'm all in favor of a full investigation of BOTH Trump and Susan Rice. If you weren't such a partisan hack, you would agree.
And as I said earlier, his own people leak anonymous all the time. So he should maybe do a better job of hiring people since it's so bad. Sounds like with the Flynn hire and all these leakers working for him, Trump the businessman can't hire a solid team.
But, but, but... Trump said he would use the "Greatest Minds" in his administration. He told this to his good friends at Fox and Breitbart!
Comey testified under oath to Congress that no one pressured the FBI to drop the Flynn investigation. Maybe the reason Comey didn't show anyone this memo is because he didn't want to be charged with perjury.
Hahaha... the alleged "memo" was supposed to have been scribbled back in February. Here is Comey testifying under oath two weeks ago. So how does millsy reconcile the two? The same way any partisan hack would - by ignoring the more recent, recorded and sworn public testimony and talking only about the older alleged "memo"!
Lol... you're using the same argument I just used against Susan Rice. She has lied, reversed herself, and now won't testify about her unmasking activities. Her every action and statement makes it look like a cover-up.
I'm all in favor of a full investigation of BOTH Trump and Susan Rice. If you weren't such a partisan hack, you would agree.
Hey, go call your representatives. Obviously they are doing a poor job of representing your nut job perspective of the world.
NOW that you finally realize this Trump shit is serious, you start talking about wanting a Trump investigation? Weren't you downplaying it all a couple months ago? Well, you are too late to the party, stooge.
But the issue you jumped on was NOT Susan Rice "unmasking". LONG before you know anything about Susan Rice "unmasking" you lustyturd, JUMPED all over Trump's ridicuous and slanderous statement that Obama wiretapped Trump.
YOU live with that, you pathetic twit.
Now, go call your representatives. Your conspiracy theory is failing to connect with enough of your people. Read below: lustyturd's post on March 5, 2017. It's funny how he is a Trump lapdog!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad
You do have a transcript, right? The one that came from Obama's wiretap of the Trump campaign?
Ooopsie! Did I just spill the beans? Did I just say Obama wiretapped the political opposition's campaign headquarters?
Oh, fuck! Silly me. Isn't that how Watergate started? We're not supposed to do those things, are we? I mean, wiretapping and surveillance of your opponent's campaign? Who would stoop so low? As an ex-President used to say "That's not who we are!"
Tsk, tsk, tsk... oh well, at least now we're looking at a REAL scandal!
How can you call something a fact when it's false? No evidence? Are you on a Congressional committee? Have you seen all the information presented to them by the IC? Because I've seen many people in sworn testimony say that they can't speak on things because it's classified and relevant to ongoing investigations. So there's obviously some evidence they have that we can't see. Otherwise a Republican Congress would end the investigation.
But hey want to hear some things that have evidence yet Trump doesn't believe..
That Russia interfered in our election.
That his inauguration wasn't as packed as Obama's.
That his electoral college win wasn't the greatest.
That he lost the popular vote fair and square.
That he has historically low approval ratings.
That it rained at his inauguration. Sorry the lord didn't stop the rain like he claimed
Now your unnamed sources...
You want to say that unnamed sources are so bad. Yet you voted for a guy who would call in to shows as John Miller to talk about himself? And when he got caught he said it was a joke. Only after denying it was him at first. He made up his own publicists and leaked information about himself. That's ok with you but unnamed sources are terrible?
Ok, how about when Trump said a "credible source" told him about Obama's birth certificate being fake. Never gave that persons name. Tweeted many times about his sources. And we know that it was false. Nothing wrong with that huh?
Or how about in a speech where he used an "anonymous friend" as a story for terrorism in Paris.
Or when he said he had hundreds of people were calling him to back his claim about the people cheering when the towers went to down. He didn't have any names just "people".
Or how about when he cited an article based on an anonymous source about Ted Cruz father and the Kennedy assassination
Or how about every time Trump says people are saying. Never giving a name.
And as I said earlier, his own people leak anonymous all the time. So he should maybe do a better job of hiring people since it's so bad. Sounds like with the Flynn hire and all these leakers working for him, Trump the businessman can't hire a solid team.
And, all of this gives me evidence that Comey's "memo" exists.... How???
Still haven't seen that screen shot.
Hey, go call your representatives. Obviously they are doing a poor job of representing your nut job perspective of the world... Your conspiracy theory is failing to connect...
Daayyuumm! You just can't trust those far-right radical lunatic fringe publications like the New York Times anymore, can you crunchyass???
I mean, where the fuck does a lib-retarded partisan hack like you go to avoid "fake news" these days, huh? I wouldn't want you to share the same "nut job perspective of the world" as the New York Times!
And, all of this gives me evidence that Comey's "memo" exists.... How???
Still haven't seen that screen shot.
Crunch even thinks evidence is important.
All that did was show how dumb your argument is. Because Trump and his team have cited unnamed sources. And as for the evidence, again there are hearings going on. Obviously they have seen something to warrant it. It's not hard man. A Republican Congress is investigating, if there was nothing there it would be over.
How about a screenshot of proof that 3 million people voting illegally or that Obama wiretapped Trump. Or any of the other baseless claims we've heard from Trump. There is an investigation, they are collecting evidence. And they have requested Comey to proved his memo. So when that happens you will have you're memo. But I'm sure even then that won't be enough. I mean first it was fake because of two things. Then I showed you times were Trump used unnamed sources and that went away. Now you cry evidence about an ongoing investigation. You're just grasping at anything. Just because you don't see evidence, doesn't mean those investigating haven't. And just because you don't see the memo, doesn't make it any less existent. You haven't seen plenty of things but believe them. You just choose this because it crushed your guy.
Hahaha... the alleged "memo" was supposed to have been scribbled back in February. Here is Comey testifying under oath two weeks ago. So how does millsy reconcile the two? The same way any partisan hack would - by ignoring the more recent, recorded and sworn public testimony and talking only about the older alleged "memo"!
Didn't you know Youtube is a far-right, radical website? millsy will never accept your proof that the Comey "memo" is just a load of horse shit.
How about a screenshot... that Obama wiretapped Trump.
I just gave it to you, millsy. The post before yours. Sheesh. Who do you want to believe - me or the lying New York Times? Oh wait, the NYT isn't lying when it talks about a mysterious Comey memo, but it is lying when it talks about Obama's wiretaps, right? How does that work again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milly23
And just because you don't see the memo, doesn't make it any less existent. You haven't seen plenty of things but believe them. You just choose this because it crushed your guy.
"Crushed"? Lol.... why, you're just full of exaggerated hysterical hyperbole today, aintcha millsy? How about trying to reconcile your unseen but cherished "memo" with Comey's sworn public testimony in that video in my post #649?
Didn't you know Youtube is a far-right, radical website? millsy will never accept your proof that the Comey "memo" is just a load of horse shit.
Daayyuumm! I can't trust youtube either? Oh wait - it was broadcast and recorded on C-span too. Plus CNN and MSNBC carried it live. Are they all purveyors (note correct spelling, crunchyass!) of "fake news"??? Who woulda thunk it?
Comey was wrong. He broke protocol... He went against the wishes of his boss... he spoke publicly... 60 days out from a election. Way to talk about what Comey's ALLIES think...
This is making me dizzy! A few days ago - in this very thread, see above quote - millsy was castigating James Comey and I was defending the guy. Now all of a sudden Comey is a hero to millsy, and when his ALLIES leak the contents of a purported memo to the New York Times it is all 100% credible.
LOL!
He's a hero! He's a villain! Hero! Villain! Hero! Villain!
Hmmmmm, cock holder - well, that makes you the main cock sucker for Obama. And if I offended you--blame your parents for a raising a pussy. Jeeze.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milly23
No answer? I'm sure I told you that a friend of Comey told the media. That's been said publicly. So maybe you're too blinded by facts to know that. You know because a friend told the media and they reported what was said. Maybe you choose not to accept it.
And here's a hint, again you don't need alleged if you're putting memo in quotations.
And here's another hint about the witch hunt. Hot of the presses today. Trump told Flynn to stay strong (talking to a guy under investigation). Then Flynn declined to adhere to the subpoena by Congress. The later says that he hasn't declined yet. If the guy is innocent he's surely not acting like a man with nothing to hide. And if Trump wants this fair investigation, why doesn't he tell Flynn to testify to clear all of this up? Yeah it's such a "witch hunt". You're such a cockholder for Trump you can't see clear signs that something's not right.
Hahaha... the alleged "memo" was supposed to have been scribbled back in February. Here is Comey testifying under oath two weeks ago. So how does millsy reconcile the two? The same way any partisan hack would - by ignoring the more recent, recorded and sworn public testimony and talking only about the older alleged "memo"!
No the funny thing is how do you reconcile the two? Because from what I've seen, the defense to the memo is that what Trump said in the memo wasn't interfering but merely a suggestion. And in the sworn testimony he said no one interfered. But even with that, it would still be highly improper to talk to the FBI director about a ex cabinet members investigation and suggest anything. You see, you are arguing about with me about something I never said. Were do I say that I thought Comeys memo showed Trump interfered. I was just arguing the validity of the memo and what it shows about Trump. I never said Trump tried to do anything. I do think however that he was improper to talk about an investigation that he's part of. That doesn't change and never will.
I'm talking about the memo because it's the more recent news dumbass. Unless you knew about it back in February, its new to you too. Therefore it's the more recent information. It's not hard. I tell you, this is why you shouldn't go full Trump supporter. Because it's tough to juggle all the hypocrisy and lies.
Go listen to his latest presser for your new talking points. I will give you some new info.. You should no longer talk about Trump deciding to fire Comey on his own, he's now back to the deputy AG. Oh and he gave y'all a new out. He said he can only speak for himself as to collusion with Russia. So yeah there you go. So if we find out that Flynn and Manafort were colluding, but kept Trump out for plausible deniability, you can say see Trump had no clue. Only his campaign manager and the guy he appointed to his cabinet.
It's funny, y'all are lining up to defend something you have no idea about. And if you're wrong, you defended the campaign of people who undermined what our country was built upon. And you supported a guy who, even if he didn't know, we'll be the most illegitimate president we've seen.
Hmmmmm, cock holder - well, that makes you the main cock sucker for Obama. And if I offended you--blame your parents for a raising a pussy. Jeeze.
No you don't offend me. You truly aren't smart enough to take your insults to heart. But why did you have to go and bring my parents into this? You want to make it personal? [Staff edit. M] Because it's all conversation until you bring my parents into this. You want to take it there and I can meet you in person and let my some offend you.
NOW that you finally realize this Trump shit is serious, you start talking about wanting a Trump investigation? Weren't you downplaying it all a couple months ago? Well, you are too late to the party, stooge.
