Author Topic: Comey & Trump - NEVER believe anything a government official says without evidence  (Read 164 times)

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
This is a major lesson from Vietnam, and a major lesson from Iraq and "WMD's", among thousands of other lessons.  Government can't be trusted, many of them are trained lawyers, and all of them are professional liars.  Solid, verifiable evidence should be necessary before we believe ANYTHING.

As much as I dislike Trump, this includes Comey & the leaked dossier from months ago that implicated Trump in all sorts of scandalous Russian encounters. Maybe Comey is telling the truth (at least he volunteered to testify under oath).  But personal memos are not evidence. Comey is a trained lawyer.  He was also the head of the FBI, who you'd think would be smart enough to bring along a gadget James Bond-style to record conversions with Trump if he felt threatened rather than rely on he-said she-said.

We need to keep in mind that Trump is a jerk capable of anything, but we also have to keep in mind that he is still an outsider who doesn't play the typical corrupt Washington political games, which is unprecedented in the modern era.  The GOP and their donors can't control Trump, and that's a huge threat to them and the trillions $$$ the special interests are worth, which is a massive amount power.  Consider that Trump is now in more legal trouble than W. Bush was ever in...and Trump has only been in office a few months! Consider that virtually the entire GOP was behind Dubya & his lies before Iraq, & almost half of the Democrats too:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution#Passage_of_the_full_resolution  And consider that the CIA & George Tenet was in on the sham with Dubya, & consider if the FBI should be trusted any more than the CIA?

My main point is:  do not believe anything on face.  WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Social Buttons


Online jmt18325

  • Moderator in Chief
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
    • View Profile
There is actually a lot of evidence for some of things that Comey says - Russian interference for example, is proven.  As for Trump, well, he way not be Washington corrupt, but he's probably the most corrupt president in history.  That's after less than 150 days.

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
There is actually a lot of evidence for some of things that Comey says - Russian interference for example, is proven.  As for Trump, well, he way not be Washington corrupt, but he's probably the most corrupt president in history.  That's after less than 150 days.

Where's the evidence?  People saying it's so doesn't make it so.

Russian interference is proven?  It probably happened, but what's the "proof"?  A newspaper article of some government official saying it happened isn't proof.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Online jmt18325

  • Moderator in Chief
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
    • View Profile
Where's the evidence?  People saying it's so doesn't make it so.

Russian interference is proven?  It probably happened, but what's the "proof"?  A newspaper article of some government official saying it happened isn't proof.

I don't personally have proof of how quantum physics works either.  Should I disbelieve that? 

Online BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
    • View Profile
  He was also the head of the FBI, who you'd think would be smart enough to bring along a gadget James Bond-style to record conversions with Trump if he felt threatened rather than rely on he-said she-said.


Maybe he didn't feel threatened until after the meeting.  In his testimony he said Trump had been praising him prior to the meeting, after all.

I don't think there is any way you could argue Comey was against Trump with the way he openly investigated Clinton's email, twice, right before the election, yet kept quiet about the Trump investigation which had been going on since June.

Consider that Trump is now in more legal trouble than W. Bush was ever in...and Trump has only been in office a few months! Consider that virtually the entire GOP was behind Dubya & his lies before Iraq, & almost half of the Democrats too:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution#Passage_of_the_full_resolution  And consider that the CIA & George Tenet was in on the sham with Dubya, & consider if the FBI should be trusted any more than the CIA?


I remember things very differently than you, I don't remember W being in any trouble at all, in spite of all his lying.  The Republicans defended him to the end the way they are doing now with Trump.

They only turned on him at the end when the housing market tanked. 


Offline wilber

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 200
    • View Profile
I kind of think recording a private conversation with a President without their knowledge would be illegal.

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
I don't personally have proof of how quantum physics works either.  Should I disbelieve that?

Was quantum physics theorized by politicians?  Or by thousands of scientists publishing tens of thousands of research papers showing results of repeatable experiments?  I'd assume you'd take thousands of scientists word for it because they're generally very reliable.  Government officials?  Not so much.

Personally, I think politicians and certain government officials should should usually be assumed to be lying until proven otherwise.  Or at least their words taken with huge grains of salt & face heavy skepticism until proven otherwise, with evidence.

"We know where they (WMD's) are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad." - Donald Rumsfeld, prior to2003  Iraq invasion.  Did you take his word for it at the time smallc?  I'll admit i probably did...oops!  Well now we have another Donald in hot water...WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE EVERYONE??
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
The Director of the CIA George Tenet to the FRICKIN PRESDIENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

According to a report by veteran investigative journalist Bob Woodward in his book Plan of Attack, Tenet privately lent his personal authority to the intelligence reports about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq.[41] At a meeting on December 12, 2002, he assured Bush that the evidence that Iraq had WMDs amounted to a "slam dunk case."

Quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Tenet#Iraq_WMD_controversy

I'm only using this Tenet/Trump case as just one example to a larger point.  This is the point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgubG-MOPT4

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Online jmt18325

  • Moderator in Chief
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
    • View Profile
James Comey is not a politician.  That's where your theory falls apart.  Donald Trump, despite your insistence otherwise, is a politician - just not a very good one.  Assuming that James Comey is lying without evidence when we in fact have leaked NSA reports that show otherwise is foolish.

Online jmt18325

  • Moderator in Chief
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
  • Location: Waterhen, Manitoba
    • View Profile

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
James Comey is not a politician.  That's where your theory falls apart

No he isn't a politician, he's a very high-ranking government official, and he sure behaves more politically than the vast majority of FBI Directors & other  civil servants.  George Tenet wasn't a politician either, nor J. Edgar Hoover.  Slam dunk i says.

Quote
Donald Trump, despite your insistence otherwise, is a politician - just not a very good one.

I never said Trump wasn't a politician, I said he wasn't a tradition Washington politician...until now that is.

Quote
Assuming that James Comey is lying without evidence when we in fact have leaked NSA reports that show otherwise is foolish.

I shouldn't have said "assume he is lying", like I said...more like be very skeptical of everything he and every other high-ranking government official says.  Comey, Trump, Trudeau, whoever regardless.

Comey might be right, Trump smells rotten, we know the Russians are a rotten lot.  I'm just amazed at all these people (not saying you) who are so desperate to hang Trump's head on a stake because he's such an a-hole that they buy in to all of this, including the leaked dossier allegations, without much evidence (so far).
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
 ::) to this thread.

Moonlight Graham reminds me of some contrarian MRA type who would defend Bill Cosby after the 36th woman came forward. 

Whatevs.
I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson

Offline segnosaur

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
As much as I dislike Trump, this includes Comey & the leaked dossier from months ago that implicated Trump in all sorts of scandalous Russian encounters.
Keep in mind that the current line of investigation is not into Trump himself colluding with the Russians, the investigation is whether Trump interfered with an existing investigation.

Had Trump not fired Comey, he would probably have not been under investigation (at least at this point).
Quote
Maybe Comey is telling the truth (at least he volunteered to testify under oath).  But personal memos are not evidence.
Actually, they are.

Granted, its not as strong as (for example) a taped conversation, but the fact that the memos were written (and seen by others) shortly after the events occurred gives them a higher amount of gravitas than just a straight claim made weeks/months after.

Quote
Comey is a trained lawyer.  He was also the head of the FBI, who you'd think would be smart enough to bring along a gadget James Bond-style to record conversions with Trump if he felt threatened rather than rely on he-said she-said.
Not sure if such recordings would be considered illegal in that situation. So even if he caught Trump saying "I'm guilty", Comey himself might have been subject to various laws regarding wiretapping/eavesdropping/etc.

Quote
The GOP and their donors can't control Trump, and that's a huge threat to them and the trillions $$$ the special interests are worth, which is a massive amount power.
Even though the big donors can't "control" trump, he is friendly enough to their interests (big tax breaks to the rich, loosing financial/environmental regulations, etc.) that they don't need to.

Quote
Consider that Trump is now in more legal trouble than W. Bush was ever in...and Trump has only been in office a few months! Consider that virtually the entire GOP was behind Dubya & his lies before Iraq, & almost half of the Democrats too
I think the reason that Trump is in more legal trouble than Bush is because, well, he's dirtier and more incompetent than Bush ever was.

There were many reasons to criticize Bush. But even at his worst, I don't think Bush was anywhere near as bad as Trump when it comes to lying, etc.
Quote
My main point is:  do not believe anything on face.  WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE?
There's plenty of circumstantial evidence.

We know (for example) of the following links between Russia and various people within Trump's organization:
- Flynn lied about contacts with Russian officials
- Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort was a business partner of several Russian businessmen
- Eric Trump admitted that they don't get funding from American banks, but they get the financing they need from Russian banks
- Meetings between Trump's son-in-law and adviser Kushner and Russian banks and Russian officials prior to Trump being sworn in

We also have multiple U.S. intelligence agencies stating that the hackers involved in the U.S. elections were based in Russia.

Now, none of that is concrete proof of collusion. However, it is enough to sustain investigations. Which is the whole point... to build on evidence to see what crimes may have been committed.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/06/15/mueller_reportedly_investigating_kushner_s_financial_dealings_with_russia.html
http://nypost.com/2017/05/07/eric-trump-said-dads-golf-courses-were-funded-by-russia/

Now, as for Trump himself: As I pointed out, the main issue isn't whether Trump himself colluded with the Russians, but whether Trump attempted to influence the investigations into the other people. (Trump may himself have been involved but that doesn't appear to be the main problem right now.) So what evidence do we have that Trump may be guilty of interfering with the election? We have:

- Comey's testimony and memos. (Yes, its not hard proof, but the fact that he wrote things down ahead of time gives his testimony more weight than just a simple claim after the fact.)
- The fact that Comey himself was actually fired, along with conflicting claims about why he was fired. (If Trump couldn't keep his story straight, it kind of affects his credibility.)
- Reports that people like NSA chief Rogers and Director of Intelligence Dan Coats were asked by the whitehouse to make statements about how "the president was not under investigation". (Now, part of that information comes from 'anonymous sources'; however, they were reported in fairly respectable mainstream publications.)

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/22/15678342/trump-russia-probe

Offline Moonlight Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
::) to this thread.

Moonlight Graham reminds me of some contrarian MRA type who would defend Bill Cosby after the 36th woman came forward. 

Whatevs.

Do you understand my point!??!  I'm not saying what Comey is saying is false!  And it certainly looks like Trump has had some shady dealings with Russia, I'm NOT defending Trump, that's not my point.  I'm saying don't under-estimate what government is capable of, & don't take anyone's word on its face no matter how "official" it sounds.  Be skeptical, use critical thinking.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Offline msj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 226
  • Location: Vancouver Island
    • View Profile
Do you understand my point!??!  I'm not saying what Comey is saying is false!  And it certainly looks like Trump has had some shady dealings with Russia, I'm NOT defending Trump, that's not my point.  I'm saying don't under-estimate what government is capable of, & don't take anyone's word on its face no matter how "official" it sounds.  Be skeptical, use critical thinking.

No kidding, Sherlock.

You may think this is what you sound like but it isn't. You sound like a MRA with a freezer full of pudding pops jumping at the chance to defend Bill Cosby as yet another woman comes foward.

Trump has self-incriminated himself with his Twitter TL and what his sons have said publicly about Trump's relations with Russia.

Just this evidence alone goes back nearly a decade so we do not need anything from Comey's memos.

In fact, it is how Comey was fired and Trump tweeted about it being related to Russia, to then have Session's testify that Comey was fired for reasons unrelated to Russia, that are so obvious.

Hence why I laugh at your thread. Evidence is not sealed up in a vaccuum full of Comey's memos.

It's been staring us in the face long before the election. 

Sort of like a cocktail served by Mr. Pudding Pop.

 
I've gotta have more cow bell! -Bruce Dickinson