+1000 credibility for those tweets.

Team Hilldawg bleaches emails and hits phones with hammers after a subponea, and Trump is under investigation for obstruction of justice? LOL the looney left.

6/16/2017 12:18:51 PM

Quote :

"Not really the end of a religion, so much as the end of a religion murdering people. It's amazing how these simple nuances elude leftists."

Islam doesn't kill people, people kill people.

6/16/2017 1:59:08 PM

Trump: I'm under investigation.

Trump's WH and lawyers: He's not under investigation.

It cracks me up that his people basically say to ignore what the president says.

6/18/2017 11:52:17 AM

Funny how you never have all of them telling the truth. When Trump tells the truth, everyone around him lies. Vice versa.

6/18/2017 2:14:26 PM

Trump's lawyer got a lawyer

6/18/2017 2:25:00 PM

6/18/2017 4:32:53 PM

Still a lying man-child

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-latest-approval-rating-barack-obama-fifty-per-cent-rasmussen-poll-data-suggests-a7795876.html

6/18/2017 8:37:02 PM

Hasn't tweeted about the most recent London attack...I'm shocked.

6/19/2017 7:50:16 AM

Well it was an attack on Muslims worshiping. He probably isn't too worked up about it.

6/19/2017 8:28:40 AM

yea in his mind the attackers in this situation are just fighting the good fight against radical Islamic terrorism

6/19/2017 3:48:36 PM

Trump is calling up the Obama people to see if they have the "tapes".

6/19/2017 5:17:05 PM

Trump voters: He is doing a fabulous job
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-38804462/trump-voters-say-us-president-is-doing-a-fabulous-job

(video)

6/20/2017 4:18:14 AM

That video was made after only a week of Trump in office. I'll be interested what folks say next week, after the senate publicly releases their healthcare bill.

6/20/2017 8:43:44 AM

So what's he going to do to NK? I hear people clamoring for some type of justice. It's obvious that the only reason they let him come home was to not have the responsibility of him dying on NK soil.

6/20/2017 9:26:49 AM

Nothing. What can he do. We have no leverage and no assets to speak of within NK. Short of some sort of military action, which is absurd, all he can do is talk strongly.

6/20/2017 9:57:59 AM

They have nukes. They're pretty much untouchable now.

6/20/2017 10:03:45 AM

So the news keeps making these special elections a referendum on Trump and his policies, and a bellwether for 2018.

If that is the case, it isn't looking good for Democrats, which to me is crazy. They should be able to mop the floor at this point, even in long-held Republican strongholds.

6/20/2017 10:36:50 PM

Maybe the days of "the democrats are bad so lets give power to the republicans who are bad so lets give power to the democrats who are bad so lets give power to the republicans" are coming to an end.

6/20/2017 10:43:30 PM

Didn't Montana's GOP candidate bodyslammed a reporter the day before his election and still won? Idk if these districts would ever elect a democratic candidate.

Edit: I'm not familiar with Montana I. General so this is probably a bad take.

[Edited on June 20, 2017 at 11:07 PM. Reason : .]

6/20/2017 11:06:51 PM

Quote :

"So the news keeps making these special elections a referendum on Trump and his policies, and a bellwether for 2018. If that is the case, it isn't looking good for Democrats, which to me is crazy. They should be able to mop the floor at this point, even in long-held Republican strongholds."

Not that I put that much stock in special elections at all (Dems didn't lose any in 2008 and still lost 2010) but the Dems gained 15 points in the Georgia election, which would mean the Dems would easliy take the house if it happened nationwide.

6/21/2017 12:00:29 AM

Quote :

"So what's he going to do to NK? I hear people clamoring for some type of justice. It's obvious that the only reason they let him come home was to not have the responsibility of him dying on NK soil. "

He will find a way to sanction them through china and futher starve the population of north korea. It won't fix anything but the deaths of additional innocent north koreans will serve as vengeance for the american death.

6/21/2017 1:41:20 AM

In all seriousness, last night was huge for Trump. He will see it as further proof of a mandate for his agenda, including healthcare. And members of congress will have a lot of their fears of working with him allayed. I can't blame them. Republicans want what he has to offer.

Once the dust settles on everything, this will be a nightmare for the GOP but for now they are going to start rolling things through and not worry about the future. Healthcare, tax cuts, welfare reductions, etc.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 8:05 AM. Reason : X]

6/21/2017 8:04:31 AM

I mean...it's Georgia. Did anyone expect him to win? It's impressive that it got as close as it was.

6/21/2017 8:22:59 AM

No, not really when you take in how much money was spent on his attempt.

6/21/2017 8:38:28 AM

That's a false talking point. Outside Super PACs spent more on Handel than Ossoff.

BOTH spent a ton.

6/21/2017 8:51:23 AM

Yeah I saw Democrats spent between $25 - $30 million on this campaign. Not a good look... Especially when the Republican candidate explicitly said in a debate "I don't support a livable wage".

^got a source for the repub superpac donation money? first i heard of it.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 8:55 AM. Reason : .]

6/21/2017 8:54:12 AM

https://www.issueone.org/money-behind-expensive-u-s-house-race-history/

6/21/2017 9:39:06 AM

The Republicans right now are looking like the football team that won the championship last year but are now struggling against early season cupcakes. They are still undefeated, but they should be concerned.

6/21/2017 10:13:46 AM

http://www.businessinsider.com/georgia-special-election-results-ossoff-karen-handel-2017-6

6/21/2017 1:44:31 PM

Looks to me like money doesn't really matter that much at this point, considering the races the Dems didn't spend anything on we're as close or closer than the one they poured money into.

6/21/2017 2:23:34 PM

It will never not amaze me that Trump will pump up a Goldman Sachs guy (Cohn) who is a bleeding heart liberal who hates him and only took the job to get $200m in personal options from GS. The best part is he has no clue the guy thinks he's a joke.

[Edited on June 21, 2017 at 8:33 PM. Reason : He was taking about his Goldman guys to a bunch of Iowans tonight who cheered GS]

6/21/2017 8:32:47 PM

Quote :

"The Republicans right now are looking like the football team that won the championship last year but are now struggling against early season cupcakes. They are still undefeated, but they should be concerned."

Permission granted to continue to chalk up those moral victories.

Q1: On how many bills can moral victories vote?

Q2: How many moral victories (read: defeats) are needed for Dems to realize they really are losing? It's up to, what, 1004 now?

PELOSI ETERNAL HOUSE MINORITY LEADER!!!

6/22/2017 12:31:08 AM

You're right, the Republicans are certain to win every race from now on because they have won some special election races in what were considered extremely safe districts.

No reason to be concerned about former strongholds turning into close races.

Just keep doing what you're doing and the Republicans will have every house and senate seat by 2020.

6/22/2017 12:42:09 AM

Quote :

"No reason to be concerned about former strongholds turning into close races."

An important caveat here is that the Dems have FLOODED money in from all over the country (Cali was a huge donor for the GA race) and lost by 5 pts (in GA for instance). So, calling it a close race is a bit of a misnomer considering how much effort was put in to close it within 5 pts as opposed to the normal double digit gap in a state like GA.

6/22/2017 1:14:43 AM

You guys are still talking about strongholds and trying to use old metrics to predict the outcome of elections as if 2016 never happened. Things are different now. The Trump coalition is unique and unpollable.

6/22/2017 1:26:08 AM

They are pollable. The general election national polls were spot on (Clinton +2/3) and the three swing states he won were all within the MOE (aside from maybe PA). And his coalition had little to do with GA-06 anyway. He wasn't hardly mentioned the entire campaign.

But you are right about unique and I'd add impossible to campaign negatively against. That hit me as I sat and watched his crowd raucously cheer the mention of Goldman Sachs last night just a half year after raucously booing Goldman Sachs. It hit me what he has is a pure cult of personality. And nothing will break that, not even a realization he was conning them from the start. Unless Democrats come up with a real working mans plan and goals (they have literally none right now except not-Trump) that make sense and are achievable they are fucked against Trump.

I'll freely admit that I love the anti-Trump stuff. It's easy for me to love that because I am basically the prototypical "east coast elite" (I use quotes because I don't FEEL like I am but to a lot I'd look like that). I read something recently that people's political and social goals are basically like the hierarchy of needs -- once basic and desired things are met they move onto social issues like equality and justice. All of the so-called elites are there and it's an entirely different place than large swaths of middle America.

(Note that they can pick up a ton of House seats and maybe even flip the house on not-Trump rhetoric but this isn't sustainable and just kicks the can.)

[Edited on June 22, 2017 at 6:45 AM. Reason : X]

6/22/2017 6:40:35 AM

Quote :

"once basic and desired things are met they move onto social issues like equality and justice virtue-signaling so I feel better about myself"

fixed it for you

6/22/2017 11:29:27 AM

Guys, believe it or not, there were no tapes.

Quote :

""Trump raised the possibility of tapes in a strategic fashion to ensure that Comey told the truth, said the person""

I'm sure there are people who believe this, sadly.

[Edited on June 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM. Reason : X]

6/22/2017 12:54:01 PM

So he's saying that public surveillance is so widespread in this country, that you can almost assume there is a tape of everything somewhere.

To be fair, he never said there were tapes. In hindsight, he skated around actually saying there were tapes and can claim he spent the last 41 days contacting intelligence officials to see if they had the tapes.

This is all in line with the notion that he was wiretapped by Obama.

[Edited on June 22, 2017 at 2:20 PM. Reason : k]

6/22/2017 2:15:49 PM

[Edited on June 22, 2017 at 2:25 PM. Reason : nvmd]

6/22/2017 2:24:34 PM

wow

6/22/2017 2:30:19 PM

Earl!

6/22/2017 2:43:23 PM

What was wrong with my post? I know I post a lot of controversial stuff but honestly don't see anything in the last post that would be controversial?

Quote :

"May 12, 2017 Trump tweets: "James Comey better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!""

This tweet does not suggest he has tapes despite what CNN is repeating.

Quote :

"June 8th Asked to definitively say if there is a taping system in the White House, Sanders said: "I have no idea." "Again, I'm not sure, that's not something I can answer. You might check with Secret Service, if you're asking from a security standpoint." "I would refer you to Secret Service, particularly given the nature of your question is about the security of the White House. I would imagine Secret Service is not usually big on discussing the security of the White House, but I would refer you to them on that question." "I'll try to look under the couches.""

Quote :

"June 9, 2017 The President was asked about the tapes during a news conference in the Rose Garden with the Romanian President. "I'm not hinting anything," Trump said. "I'll tell you about it over a very short period of time." A reporter asked: "When will you tell us about the recordings?" "Over a fairly short period of time -- oh, you're going to be very disappointed when you hear the answer. Don't worry," Trump said."

Quote :

"June 11, 2017 Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow told ABC's 'This Week" that the President will address the tapes "next week." "The President said he is going to address the issue of the tapes, whether the tapes exist or not, next week,""

Quote :

"With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea......whether there are "tapes" or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings."

So to recap:
-at no point did he say there are tapes
-at no point did he say he had tapes
-at no point did he say there are no tapes

After watching CNN, I assume you guys are reacting to my post with blank posts because they are continuously reporting the headline that Trump has "finally admitted he has no tapes" even though he never said or implied he had tapes. He simply implied that tapes might exist.

I do think he is playing semantics though and its funny because it shows how the media jumps to conclusions about everything. As a scientist I see this all the time in their headlines after research suggests a link between X and Y they know that a lot of people use W which contains a little bit of X and make a story a saying "W CAUSES Y".

[Edited on June 22, 2017 at 6:36 PM. Reason : it may have been implied that the secret service might have had tapes]

6/22/2017 6:34:55 PM

Yeah he was just telling him that he better HOPE there's no tapes, totally not suspicious!

Like when he told Comey he HOPES he will drop his investigation
Or when a Mafioso says "Nice store you got here, I HOPE nothing happens to it"

All totally innocent and normal things to say to someone.

6/22/2017 6:42:32 PM

You're adding to his words by jumping to a conclusion. The proper context is that it came from a guy who already claimed he was being recorded by the government for months.

Trump is laughing right now at all of the fake news and people taking his words to mean more than what they say

[Edited on June 22, 2017 at 7:03 PM. Reason : he's playing all of you]

6/22/2017 7:02:48 PM

Yeah. Pretty sure CNN was talking about that bit of breaking news for three hours today.

As much as they poured into the pre-Ossoff defeat analysis of what it would mean if Handel hadn't beat his Ossoff, I'm surprised they are switching to something about Trump so quickly.

And some people say I'm obsessed over Hillary?

6/22/2017 7:22:34 PM

he's the fucking President

6/22/2017 7:28:05 PM

By your astute logic, why did they only cover ten minutes of his speech in Iowa yesterday?

They spent more time talking about two tweets than they did his speech.

They don't care covering the President; they care about covering their analysis of the President.

6/22/2017 7:39:36 PM

because his tweets are far more important than a campaign rally?

6/22/2017 7:44:34 PM

Can someone answer for me why people watch CNN if they hate it? How is that enjoyable.

I don't like Hannity. I don't watch Hannity.

6/22/2017 7:49:20 PM