d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > Trump 2020 > Trump Vs. Pack O' Dems
Prev1155156157158159983Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 61,687
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 28.77
Nov 23 2019 10:20pm
Quote (Ghot @ Nov 23 2019 06:53pm)



Honorable men shouldn't resign. Trump will replace them with sycophants who want to see the military turned into a band of mercenaries.
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Nov 24 2019 07:59am
Quote (EndlessSky @ 23 Nov 2019 23:06)
#Faglogic




kek
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 286.00
Nov 24 2019 08:46am
Quote
Visited a great family of a young man under major surgery at the amazing Walter Reed Medical Center. Those are truly some of the best doctors anywhere in the world. Also began phase one of my yearly physical. Everything very good (great!). Will complete next year.


Trump on Twitter.

He went to a hospital to visit a veteran having major surgery and support his or her family, and then had a routine medical check up?

Dr. Sanjay Gupta
Quote
We know that Trump is 73 years old, has heart disease and is clinically obese. For any man of that age and medical history, an unexpected visit to the hospital is concerning.
Over the past week, I have spoken to doctors who've previously worked at the White House and those who are currently in touch with the White House. They all say that what happened last weekend is unusual: an unscheduled hospital visit for what was characterized as very routine testing -- testing that could have been done at the White House.


Quote
Given that the White House had previously given plenty of advance notice about the President's past physical exams, last weekend's visit to Walter Reed reportedly took everyone by surprise, including much of the staff at the hospital itself. Whenever the President is planning a visit to Walter Reed, an institution-wide notice goes out, making staff aware of certain road and corridor closings. According to a person familiar with the matter, that didn't happen last weekend.

Also striking: the fact that the president's physician, Dr. Sean Conley, rode with Trump in the presidential motorcade. Typically, the doctor rides separately from the President for security reasons. A former White House doctor told me it had never happened during their time there.




He has been driving around with his personal doctor and made an unannounced, unscheduled, and unplanned trip to a hospital to allegedly have tests done that the physician that drives around with him could have done in his home where they had been.

For some reason it was immediately announced that: "Despite some of the speculation, The President has not had any chest pain, nor was he evaluated or treated for any urgent or acute issues. Specifically, he did not undergo any specialized cardiac or neurologic evaluations". With Trump it is always more likely that the opposite of what he says is true and there is absolutely no way any reasonable person would expect him to be honest about this, and it isn't the first time he had a doctor lie for him, as he had his family doctor say that a geriatric morbidly obese man with heart disease is the healthiest man to every be president when the guy before him was literally way healthier and in better shape, not morbidly obese, less disease on heart, etc. Glot will except this, but with those whose brains are functional this doesn't past muster.



Quote
For starters, all the tests Conley described could've been performed at the White House instead of the hospital. Many blood tests require the patient to fast overnight and are thus performed first thing in the morning -- not in the middle of the afternoon, as apparently happened with the President.
And remember, the President had these tests just nine months ago. One of the reasons doctors wait a year to order labs for a routine physical is to better assess the impact of medication and lifestyle changes over a consistent interval of time. There is no benefit to drawing the blood early, unless there is a concern about something.

In Conley's memo, he described the visit as a "routine, planned interim checkup," not a "physical exam." Dr. Jennifer Peña, who served as a physician to Vice President Mike Pence until 2018, told CNN's Jeremy Diamond that these two characterizations are significantly different.

"Routine annual is where we do a comprehensive history and physical exam, with any necessary labs and studies," she said, while noting that an "interim checkup" suggests a "follow up" visit for a condition or medication that is being monitored.


So what was this stop to the ER essentially about?

Quote (excellence @ Nov 24 2019 08:59am)


Someone on Twitter says it so it is true!

#tweets4twits #t4t

This post was edited by Skinned on Nov 24 2019 08:52am
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Nov 24 2019 10:41am
Quote (Goomshill @ Nov 23 2019 05:42pm)
Robert Mueller fired him after he texts came out


As he should have. But anyone with a triple digit IQ in their private lives would be critical of Trump, so it's not good reason to believe the person will act unethically.

Quote (Ghot @ Nov 23 2019 09:53pm)


I don't believe him.
Member
Posts: 50,869
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,846.00
Nov 24 2019 11:32am
Quote (IceMage @ Nov 24 2019 10:41am)
As he should have. But anyone with a triple digit IQ in their private lives would be critical of Trump, so it's not good reason to believe the person will act unethically.


Somehow I feel there's a distinction to be made between "People critical of Trump" and "People tasked with apolitical law enforcement with power over Trump, who are texting each other about how they want to join the 'resistance' by abusing their powers"
It doesn't reflect well on Mueller's probe that it was staffed with biased anti-Trump actors who were committing an uncomfortable number of abuses, premised on tainted-at-best-fabricated-at-worst evidence used to initiate the probe.
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Nov 24 2019 11:55am
Quote (Goomshill @ Nov 24 2019 12:32pm)
Somehow I feel there's a distinction to be made between "People critical of Trump" and "People tasked with apolitical law enforcement with power over Trump, who are texting each other about how they want to join the 'resistance' by abusing their powers"
It doesn't reflect well on Mueller's probe that it was staffed with biased anti-Trump actors who were committing an uncomfortable number of abuses, premised on tainted-at-best-fabricated-at-worst evidence used to initiate the probe.


Saying "I could've done more" or whatever it was isn't evidence that the LEO wanted to abuse his power to take Trump down. It could obviously refer to political activity, or even more vigorous, legal law enforcement activity.

"The resistance" is just a dumb slogan signifying political opposition to Trump.
Member
Posts: 50,869
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,846.00
Nov 24 2019 12:01pm
Quote (IceMage @ Nov 24 2019 11:55am)
Saying "I could've done more" or whatever it was isn't evidence that the LEO wanted to abuse his power to take Trump down. It could obviously refer to political activity, or even more vigorous, legal law enforcement activity.

"The resistance" is just a dumb slogan signifying political opposition to Trump.


so he was tweeting the dumb slogan signifying his political opposition to Trump, before abusing his power to take Trump down? Not sure where you're going with that.
Quote
Redacted FBI lawyer: “Is it making you rethink your commitment to the Trump administration?”
Clinesmith: “Hell no. Viva le resistance”
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Nov 24 2019 12:07pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Nov 24 2019 01:01pm)
so he was tweeting the dumb slogan signifying his political opposition to Trump, before abusing his power to take Trump down? Not sure where you're going with that.


My general point is just that having anti-Trump views exposed via text or whatever isn't good evidence that we should suspect someone of abusing their power.

This particular individual did abuse his power by forging the email. I don't know the timeline of when that happened, whether it came before or after the resistance text. I assume before.

This post was edited by IceMage on Nov 24 2019 12:10pm
Member
Posts: 50,869
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,846.00
Nov 24 2019 12:22pm
Quote (IceMage @ Nov 24 2019 12:07pm)
My general point is just that having anti-Trump views exposed via text or whatever isn't good evidence that we should suspect someone of abusing their power.

This particular individual did abuse his power by forging the email. I don't know the timeline of when that happened, whether it came before or after the resistance text. I assume before.


except numerous FBI officials involved in both the Clinton email & Mueller investigation weren't just espousing general opposition to Trump's politics, they were texting about using their positions to undermine him. Which they then did, engaging in a some combination of outright abuses/fraud like the fabricated evidence and circular evidence chains, and more ambiguous/borderline stuff like giving Hillary every benefit of the doubt and tunnel visioning on Trump. Something the IG called out in his review of those texts iirc. The former stuff might be prosecutable, the latter stuff might not, but either way its enough to damage the legitimacy and credibility of the whole operation. And that's the result of their own actions, not something conspiracy theorists forced upon them.

It would be one thing if Mueller had assembled a team of 'angry democrats' and Trump smeared them and questioned their bias, without ever showing any misconduct. But having McCabe, Comey, Strzok, Page, Clinesmith, etc all run around roleplaying the spanish inquisition while fudging evidence and leaking to the media? Its pretty hard to pretend the knives weren't out for Trump & Co when their texts read like Brutus on the ides of march. And its telling that they were willing to accept Crowdstrike's cybersecurity analysis of their own server but set up a sting operation to entrap Flynn by exploiting and jeopardizing interdepartmental cooperation in the IC.
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
Nov 24 2019 12:39pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Nov 24 2019 01:22pm)
except numerous FBI officials involved in both the Clinton email & Mueller investigation weren't just espousing general opposition to Trump's politics, they were texting about using their positions to undermine him. Which they then did, engaging in a some combination of outright abuses/fraud like the fabricated evidence and circular evidence chains, and more ambiguous/borderline stuff like giving Hillary every benefit of the doubt and tunnel visioning on Trump. Something the IG called out in his review of those texts iirc. The former stuff might be prosecutable, the latter stuff might not, but either way its enough to damage the legitimacy and credibility of the whole operation. And that's the result of their own actions, not something conspiracy theorists forced upon them.

It would be one thing if Mueller had assembled a team of 'angry democrats' and Trump smeared them and questioned their bias, without ever showing any misconduct. But having McCabe, Comey, Strzok, Page, Clinesmith, etc all run around roleplaying the spanish inquisition while fudging evidence and leaking to the media? Its pretty hard to pretend the knives weren't out for Trump & Co when their texts read like Brutus on the ides of march. And its telling that they were willing to accept Crowdstrike's cybersecurity analysis of their own server but set up a sting operation to entrap Flynn by exploiting and jeopardizing interdepartmental cooperation in the IC.


I don't agree with all your characterizations of what FBI or DOJ officials did, but I'm not sure we're disagreeing here. The basic truth is that Trump is a person who merits severe criticism from anybody who doesn't have their head up their ass. So it's not surprising that some(or most) of those in the FBI who acted unethically were shown to have criticized Trump.

Therefore, an FBI official who texted anti-Trump sentiments shouldn't be looked at as some unethical political actor without actual evidence of wrongdoing.

Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1155156157158159983Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll