Posts made by royalcrown89

@amicusets:

@royalcrown89:

:spam:

Typical liberal democrat. When facts aren't on your side, try and obfuscate and twist meanings to fit an agenda so you can call people names. When that gets called out you call it spam or irrelevant.

FTR: O'Reilly was actually one of the "real" commentators who covered Obama. He called out what he believed to be his and his administration's failings, but he also called out others who were overly harsh or just plain partisan and discussed the things he thought Obama was doing right. I hate to admit is, because I have always hated O'Reilly, but the truth is the truth.

I'm not going to give a full response to something I've already explained in a previous post within this same thread. The statement from you was that #45's predecessor avoided his critics and I called that a blatant lie and proved it was a blatant lie. Fix your initial comment by saying he didn't sit down with his critics "often." I replied directly to the blatant lie and I deemed it a blatant lie because guess what, it is a blatant lie. Do you want to continue with more blatant lies or is this done?  :fight:

@Frederick:

@royalcrown89:

@Frederick:

Here is a video of Obama at the white house having a white man forcibly removed from the White House.

Obama starts out by saying "You're in MY House!"
Uh.. the White House belongs to the people.. not any president.

Youtube Video

:spam:

Why did you tag my comment as being spam?

What else do I tag something that's easy to disprove with? Was the "white man" forcibly removed because he was white? Did President Obama say, "Get this white man out of MY house?" If you can't prove any of it, then this thread and its intention is basically  :spam: Simple as that.

@Frederick:

@royalcrown89:

@Frederick:

@royalcrown89:

@amicusets:

Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.

Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg

A LIE?   You had to go back to Feb 6, 2011 to find an instance where Obama got interviewed by Bill O'Reilly?   Over 6 years ago?  Really?  That muslim terrorist was president for 8 years, and got a free-pass from the press.

6 years ago, 8 years ago; how is that relevant to the quote made by amicusets? The quote was that President Obama "avoided" his critics but there is proof that he did multiple interviews with his critics. No one said anything about how frequent or rare it was, the statement was that he avoided his critics which is a blatant lie.

I get it.. so RoyalCrown89 thinks that only doing 3 interviews with his critics in almost 3000 days is NOT avoiding his critics?  Let me make a picture for you RoyalCrown89.  This is 999 X's and one O which is 1 in 1000 (proportionate to 3 in 3000)
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Hmm… I'd say that Obama was avoiding his critics!

:spam:

@Frederick:

Here is a video of Obama at the white house having a white man forcibly removed from the White House.

Obama starts out by saying "You're in MY House!"
Uh.. the White House belongs to the people.. not any president.

Youtube Video

:spam:

@Frederick:

@royalcrown89:

@amicusets:

Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.

Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg

A LIE?   You had to go back to Feb 6, 2011 to find an instance where Obama got interviewed by Bill O'Reilly?   Over 6 years ago?  Really?  That muslim terrorist was president for 8 years, and got a free-pass from the press.

6 years ago, 8 years ago; how is that relevant to the quote made by amicusets? The quote was that President Obama "avoided" his critics but there is proof that he did multiple interviews with his critics. No one said anything about how frequent or rare it was, the statement was that he avoided his critics which is a blatant lie.

@amicusets:

@royalcrown89:

@amicusets:

Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.

Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg

8 years in office, 3 sit down interviews:
1st was in March '10 to try and get his Obamacare to poll better so he could get it passed.
2nd was the one you imaged was actually aired on the FOX channel in conjunction with their pre-SuperBowl coverage 4 years later. It also had him chiding Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly as being unfair for asking questions about ObamaCare’s shortcomings, the IRS scandal, and Benghazi.
Last was in April '16, to Chris Wallace, a registered Democrat and one of the moderators for the upcoming Presidential debates.

Obama may have been many things, but he wasn't the greatest advocate for freedom of the press.

"Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor."

That was word for word what you said, was it not? That is a blatant lie, and I provided just one pic of Barack Obama doing an interview with Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly who was very, very critical of President Obama. You then proceeded to list the other times Obama sat down with his critics, further proving you posted a blatant lie by saying he avoided them. If he avoided them, there would be NO EXAMPLES. You're a blatant liar. Simple as that.

@amicusets:

Trump doesn't hide from the media, and he also gives interviews and questions to outlets that are critical of him, unlike his predecessor.

Blatant lie
http://filmsor.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/obama-fox-news.jpg

This is awful. I'm sure no one voted for this elf to promote policies that will yet again increase our prison population with low-level drug offenders and abusers. Do you know how many people are suffering in this current opioid epidemic? There are hardworking families suffering every day with this and this administration's answer is "lock everyone up." That is not going to solve anything. Making families suffer more is not the answer. We need rehabilitation. We need jobs. We need support. This evil vile person who #45 decided was best to be our Attorney General is going to make things so much worse. I can't even call him racist because he's going to make MILLIONS of white people suffer with this, too. I've already seen firsthand the effects this administration has had on white people who I know personally. People I personally know who voted for #45 did not vote for THIS. They did not vote to have him crack down on states that have legalized both medical and recreational marijuana. They voted for jobs, opportunities, and any other chance to better their lives right now. This is awful and you cannot defend this knowing how many families are going to be destroyed with this move and other moves like it.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/attorney-general-sessions-orders-tougher-drug-crime-prosecutions-n758111

Once again, our incompetent and corrupt president is overshadowing things that we should be talking about. Had he not done that awful sit-down with Lester Holt, other things would be top news; including this Corinne Brown situation.

@amicusets:

(What is more of a story is how Vince Foster died of a "suicide" the day after President Clinton fired his fiercely independent FBI Chief, William Sessions.)

:ot:

The Deputy AG threatened to resign if all blame was pushed off on him, so no the timing has not been debunked; another layer of unknown has been added. Also #45 made things more complicated with his recent NBC News interview with Lester Holt. Why does the reason for Comey's firing keep changing?

@amicusets:

This doesn't really belong in Politics. Maybe some will find the sophomoric attempt humorous and it could be in jokes.

Political satire doesn't belong in the politics thread??  :crazy2:

That would be headlining news had our incompetent president not fired the FBI director. Talk about bad timing  :cheers:

"Kellyanne Conway Declares There Isn't a Country Named Russia"

When pressed today about the possibility of #45's administration having ties to Russia, Kellyanne Conway replied with the question, "What's Russia? I've never heard of a country called Russia." Follow-up questions were ignored by Conway as she made her way out of the White House. Reporters then spotted Sean Spicer in the nearby bushes talking to himself. When asked about Conway's strange behavior, Spicer told reporters, "I'll only talk to you about it if you turn off the lights."

The lights were turned off and speaking from the bushes in the dark, Spicer informed the media, "Kellyanne is off her meds. And so am I." Spicer then proceeded to begin eating leaves from the bushes surrounding him, prompting every reporter to back away.

"The end of this administration is near," said Steve Bannon, before howling at the full moon.

Once again, you can't expect people to just sit and say, "Well, I'll give #45 and his administration the benefit of the doubt. I mean, nothing else suspicious has happened." THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. A foreign power was successful in helping one candidate win the presidency. There is an investigation to see if the Almighty Orange one and/or anyone in his inner circle cooperated with said foreign power. This is not going away no matter what you Almighty Orange worshipers say. And the more shady this gets due to situations like firing the FBI director at odd times, the worse this is going to get. Simple as that.

Hopefully no attacks or anything–-manufactured by the president himself---will happen to cause a rallying effect around him. If it does, be suspicious not blind  :blind:

@amicusets:

@royalcrown89:

This is blatant corruption and I cannot wait for the leaked proof and subsequent independent investigation that will put all of this into perspective. The dark cloud continues…

Leaked proof? As much information that has been leaked do you really think if they had ANY proof of corruption it wouldn't have been known by now? Stop, take a breath and give the tin foil hat a break.

Nope, that's not how a dark cloud works. Slow drip, drip, drip just like the Hillary Clinton emails. That keeps it constantly on the minds of people. This thing is already over, it's all about time at this point. The funny thing, just like with Nixon, #45's last line of defense is the courts and we all know he blew his reputation with them before he even took office. Nixon tried to stop the Watergate tapes from being released and it was the court that brought the end to him by forcing the release of those tapes. Looks like we're headed for a repeat  :hero:

This is blatant corruption and I cannot wait for the leaked proof and subsequent independent investigation that will put all of this into perspective. The dark cloud continues…

Do you people supporting #45 on this issue seriously hear yourselves? You are asking us to simply give the benefit of the doubt without taking the context of this entire situation into consideration. Democrats and Republicans have a right to question the timing and no one is a hypocrite except the president. Are you all arguing that our president is so incompetent that he fully embraced someone that he has easily now been turned against by a simple letter? He fully embraced Comey on inauguration day on LIVE TV and has been speaking highly of him ever since. And out of nowhere, he agrees with a letter condemning Comey's actions surrounding the Hillary Clinton email investigation even though he fully supported said investigation while it was ongoing? And we're the hypocrites?  :crazy2:

@rcgjr11:

First, I agree with Frederick, that people need to be more civil in their political discourse. Passion is fine, but personally attacking people is not. You get nowhere.

Now, to outline some facts.

https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/politics/fbi-director-james-b-comeys-termination-letters-from-the-white-house-attorney-general/2430/

The above provided link contains the termination letter Trump sent to Comey, and it has the two letters submitted to the white house from BOTH Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein. The Deputy Attorney General, upon being nominated to the position a few months ago, was the longest serving US Attorney at the time, having served for about 30 years. If you read the documents in the above provided link you will see Jeff Sessions wrote a very brief letter stating he supported the conclusions of the Deputy Attorney General. It was the Deputy Attorney General whom drafted a Memoranda outlining his reasoning for recommending the removal of Comey as FBI Director. In that Memoranda, of which you can read, he cites multiple former Attorneys General and Deputy Attorneys General that served presidents of BOTH parties over the past 30+ years that came to the same conclusion that Comey was no longer fit to serve as head of that law enforcement agency.

Until there is definitive proof of collusion between the Trump and Russia, of which none publicly exists at this time, then you cannot jump to conclusions. Democrats and Republicans had called for Comey's firing. Now that it was done, Democrats are freaking out. Why can't people look at things through a non-partisan lens once in a while? I will be right there calling for Trumps impeachment if evidence comes to light that he directly worked with Russia or had knowledge that members of his campaign were working with Russia to sway the election; however, until that happens I will not jump to any conclusions like so many people are willing to do.

I feel like Jeff Sessions should not have had a say-so at all. His name should be nowhere near any of this given the conflict of interests. And nope, you cannot say "Democrats are freaking out" without providing the overall context behind why Democrats AND some Republicans (there goes your partisan argument) are freaking out. You're skipping one big question: Why in the world was Comey fired NOW? The White House needs to provide more details and be slightly more transparent about what brought them to this conclusion NOW. Why was then-candidate Agent Orange rooting for Comey and the reopened investigation into Hillary Clinton and now-president Agent Orange finds what Comey did "unacceptable?" Context is key. This does not add up; hence, people are freaking out.