Secret Service Says They don't Have Trump Tapes

[KevinKohler]

So were they investigating a blowjob or something else? The answer is something else.

He said he had no sexual relations. Proof of the blowjob marks his lie.

That is fact. Take it for what you will.

 

[Praxas]

He said he had no sexual relations. Proof of the blowjob marks his lie.

That is fact. Take it for what you will.

And what did that have to do with whitewater, you know what they were investigating?

 

[Anthony60]

I'm not defending him lying under oath. What I AM saying though is that you have to keep it in perspective. He was lying about a blowjob...not about engaging in acts of treason. That makes a difference to me....does it not make a difference at all to you?

It's just that when you say "he was lying about a blow job" you leave out the important part that he was under oath, lying about a blow job. So it sounds like he just lied about it to someone in a normal conversation, not on the witness stand.

 

[disneydude]

It's just that when you say "he was lying about a blow job" you leave out the important part that he was under oath, lying about a blow job. So it sounds like he just lied about it to someone in a normal conversation, not on the witness stand.

Fair enough...honestly, I don't mean to justify Clinton's lying. I was sorely disappointed when all of that went down and I really lost the respect that I had for him. I wasn't a big fan of his when he was elected (I think he was about my 6th choice), but he won me over while he was in office. However, after the whole Lewinsky affair, I have a hard time respecting him. I still think he was a decent President because I think one can be a good leader and still be a sewer-rat (The verdict is still out on Trump...he is obviously a sewer-rat and so far has been an ineffective leader...but perhaps he can turn that around).

My main point was that Clinton lied....(under oath) about a subject that we probably had no business asking about anyway. As a man...I understood why he would lie about a blowjob from someone not his wife.....It was not a matter of extreme important national security.

 

[Anthony60]

Fair enough...honestly, I don't mean to justify Clinton's lying. I was sorely disappointed when all of that went down and I really lost the respect that I had for him. I wasn't a big fan of his when he was elected (I think he was about my 6th choice), but he won me over while he was in office. However, after the whole Lewinsky affair, I have a hard time respecting him. I still think he was a decent President because I think one can be a good leader and still be a sewer-rat (The verdict is still out on Trump...he is obviously a sewer-rat and so far has been an ineffective leader...but perhaps he can turn that around).

My main point was that Clinton lied....(under oath) about a subject that we probably had no business asking about anyway. As a man...I understood why he would lie about a blowjob from someone not his wife.....It was not a matter of extreme important national security.

No, it wasn't all that important, but he left himself open to being charged. I was hoping that he was removed, even though I voted for him.

I remember when it was happening, I immediately thought that it was payback, and that it would not have happened if Nixon was not forced from office, also for a minor offense, having no prior knowledge of the break in, which was also pretty minor.

 

[iguanaman]

Should we fit them with ankle cuffs too, track them 24/7 and put the data in their Library?

Maybe a 24/7 lie detector device could be implanted.

I mean once you start on that how far do you go?

I think the days of trusting that Presidents can do no wrong are behind us. Trump has made it clear that whatever benefits he receives from being President are because he is smarter than us. Once that adversarial die is cast it is hard to forget.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I think the days of trusting that Presidents can do no wrong are behind us. Trump has made it clear that whatever benefits he receives from being President are because he is smarter than us. Once that adversarial die is cast it is hard to forget.

The days of treating Presidents like decent people are sure over.

The fact that means that we will only get second or third tier quality people to want to do it rates an "Oh well" from the few that seem capable of thinking that far.

Cause we be some stupid ****s.

 

[cpwill]

Tim O’Brien, who wrote the biography, “TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald” said that Trump threatened him with recordings of their conversations amidst a lawsuit about his unflattering book. There were no tapes. It was just part of Trump intimidation.

No Tapes

As I recall, that was the lawsuit where Trump admitted under oath he regularly lied.

 

[iguanaman]

The days of treating Presidents like decent people are sure over.

The fact that means that we will only get second or third tier quality people to want to do it rates an "Oh well" from the few that seem capable of thinking that far.

Cause we be some stupid ****s.

I think Trump is enough to cure us from electing incompetents. No one could have done better proving that businessmen have no business in politics at least until they have proved themselves in lower offices. It's a different world when you have to think of others besides yourself. "What's in it for me?" may be OK in the business world but it is a nightmare in public service.

 

[Mach]

I think Trump is enough to cure us from electing incompetents. No one could have done better proving that businessmen have no business in politics at least until they have proved themselves in lower offices. It's a different world when you have to think of others besides yourself. "What's in it for me?" may be OK in the business world but it is a nightmare in public service.

Trump is not your typical successful business leader. By all accounts he's only headed a boutique, and his big stab at the Casino failed miserably. He's also largely a moron, and has displayed no administrated acumen, or ability to lead and inspire competent indivuduals. Ass kissers and people wanting to ride him for the brand, sure, but that's about it.

This is a guy that delegates everything, and bangs his fist and bullies and otherwise promotes his name/brand. He's rolled the dice big, and on the failures he just uses bankruptcy and other people's money. On the random wins, he will relentlessly market as evidence of his incredible prowess.

No, I think someone like Ross Perot would have done fine. They may have made some mistakes, but the business world is full of incredible resourceful and practical, intelligent individuals, that are entirely up to the challenge. Why would most *want* to though, except for the legacy? They stand to make incredible money in business, with nearly zero of the headache of president.

But in any case, I don't think Trump is a good example of a business person not being suited for office. Trump is an incompetent goon in all respects relevant to POTUS.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I think Trump is enough to cure us from electing incompetents. No one could have done better proving that businessmen have no business in politics at least until they have proved themselves in lower offices. It's a different world when you have to think of others besides yourself. "What's in it for me?" may be OK in the business world but it is a nightmare in public service.

You sir missed completely missed the point, which is quality on offer.

 

[joG]

They really can't do their jobs like that. Should we be recording war plans? Economic strategies? How far we are willing to go in negotiations? What's our plan for airport security? National defense? Etc...

I don't think so.

I don't understand, what you are getting at.

 

[iguanaman]

Trump is not your typical successful business leader. By all accounts he's only headed a boutique, and his big stab at the Casino failed miserably. He's also largely a moron, and has displayed no administrated acumen, or ability to lead and inspire competent indivuduals. Ass kissers and people wanting to ride him for the brand, sure, but that's about it.

This is a guy that delegates everything, and bangs his fist and bullies and otherwise promotes his name/brand. He's rolled the dice big, and on the failures he just uses bankruptcy and other people's money. On the random wins, he will relentlessly market as evidence of his incredible prowess.

No, I think someone like Ross Perot would have done fine. They may have made some mistakes, but the business world is full of incredible resourceful and practical, intelligent individuals, that are entirely up to the challenge. Why would most *want* to though, except for the legacy? They stand to make incredible money in business, with nearly zero of the headache of president.

But in any case, I don't think Trump is a good example of a business person not being suited for office. Trump is an incompetent goon in all respects relevant to POTUS.

Tillerson and several others are also businessmen and they all suck. But I will admit that career politician Sessions is just as big a a-hole. His latest is askig Congress for permission to go after medical marijuana suppliers because he says they are the cause of the opiod epidemic and increased crime. What an ignorant dick.

 

[Anthony60]

I don't understand, what you are getting at.

Well then, okay.

 

[Mason66]

Well, if there are no tapes, then he lied about their implied existence in an attempt to frighten Comey into being silent. I'd say that didn't really work out very well for him.

Think this through.

Why would Comey be afraid of tapes? Would it be because he was lying about what was said?

Why would Comey care about there being tapes if they would back up what he has said?

Why would he be frightened into being silent?

 

[Mason66]

Tim O’Brien, who wrote the biography, “TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald” said that Trump threatened him with recordings of their conversations amidst a lawsuit about his unflattering book. There were no tapes. It was just part of Trump intimidation.

No Tapes

But how could that work if there was nothing on the tapes to incriminate O'Brien?

What would O'Brien have to be scared about?

 

[Mason66]

There may or may not be recordings, but it seems clear to me the most powerful man in the world threatened Comey.

As to SS not taping, that would seem to be a red herring if used as proof there was no taping:

"That doesn't mean that Trump didn't record his guests himself, or enlist White House staff to do so. But it eliminates the possibility that he'd recreated a taping system used by Presidents Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy that was run by the Secret Service."

*emphasis mine

Why would a recording of the conversation bother Comey if it backed up everything he has been saying?

Wouldn't he welcome a tape that would clear his name?

 

[Cardinal]

Think this through.

Why would Comey be afraid of tapes? Would it be because he was lying about what was said?

Why would Comey care about there being tapes if they would back up what he has said?

Why would he be frightened into being silent?

It was trump's intention to silence Comey with the implication of tapes. Obviously Comey had nothing to be afraid of and he spoke anyway.

 

[Mason66]

It was trump's intention to silence Comey with the implication of tapes. Obviously Comey had nothing to be afraid of and he spoke anyway.

There was no reason to think Comey would be afraid of a tape unless Comey was lying.

 

[Cardinal]

There was no reason to think Comey would be afraid of a tape unless Comey was lying.

Well trump obviously had something to be afraid of, and clearly still does.

 

[straykatz]

Really...not about us? Who's paying for all these witch trials?

Same people who paid for Hillary's.

 

[straykatz]

It's just that when you say "he was lying about a blow job" you leave out the important part that he was under oath, lying about a blow job. So it sounds like he just lied about it to someone in a normal conversation, not on the witness stand.

So does this mean lying is okay as long as you don't do it under oath? Now I get it....that's why Trump gets a free pass because he hasn't done it under oath....YET!

 

[Mason66]

Well trump obviously had something to be afraid of, and clearly still does.

How do you figure that?

Trump also knows what was said.

 

[Cardinal]

How do you figure that?

Trump also knows what was said.

Since he may not actually have tapes, that's doubtful.

 

[Mason66]

Since he may not actually have tapes, that's doubtful.

Trump does not know what was said?

Are you trying to say Trump was not in the room with Comey and Comey was talking to himself?

Why do you reject common sense?