Two unanswered questions
First the Cheeto-in-Chief called James Comey a "nutjob." Now he's calling him cowardly. The real coward here is Dishonest Donald himself. Clearly someone is lying. Is it the man who spent years claiming that Barrack Obama was born in Kenya? The man who lied over 30 times in a deposition when he'd sworn an oath to tell the truth? The man who lives by spreading what he considers "truthful hyperbole?" Or is the liar the former Director of the FBI who served more than one president, with distinction? The answer is found in another of Agent Orange's nicknames. Liar-in-Chief.
There are two big unanswered questions. No, one of them is not the question about possible collusion between Trump, or one of his satellites; and Russia to cause Hillary Clinton to lose the presidency. They are:
Why did 45 ask everyone else to leave the room when he admittedly spoke to James Comey?
If there are tapes, why don't you just release them and prove that you are telling the truth and Mr. Comey is the liar?
* * *
I continue to laugh at the attempt of the talking heads who attempt to defend Dishonest Donald regarding the words "I hope" that he allegedly said to Mr. Comey. When you are the ultimate authority in the "chain of command" of an employee, and you make a suggestion like that, you are engaging in exactly what James Comey said you did. You are giving "...direction." It may sound like a suggestion.
There has to have been a reason why Trump told Attorney General Jeff Sessions, among others, to leave that room. Sessions was Comey's direct report, in simple terms, his boss. Why does the boss's boss tell that boss to leave the room in order to talk to a subordinate?
Let us not forget that Dishonest Donald does not believe that any of the rules apply to him. He's lived as though he had executive privilege his entire adult life. He seems to think that the legal system is his personal club with which to attack those who stand in the way of his agenda. Yet he did something in the way Mario Puzo wrote about in his masterpiece, The Godfather.
When Amerigo Bonasera begged Don Corleone for "justice" and was told he would receive it, the Don would later tell one person what he wanted done. His acting consigliere, Tom Hagen. Hagen told one person, Peter Clemenza what to do. Clemenza told Paulie Gatto, to carry out the assault on the two youths that had raped Bonasera's daughter.
This chain of one-on-one discussions to pass on illegal instructions is designed to make certain that it can never be conclusively proven who told whom to do what. It will always become a case of "he said, he said." 45 did not want Jeff Sessions, Jared Kushner or anyone else to hear him attempt to intimidate James Comey into dropping the probe into the actions of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
* * *
As to the second question, why all the "mystery" over whether or not there are tapes of any of the conversations between the Liar-in-Chief and the former FBI director? Either there are or there aren't tapes. If they exist and they would prove the extremely unlikely event that it was Trump who was the truth-teller, why wait to release them?
Is it because there are no tapes? Seems like a very realistic possibility. As fragile as the Cheeto-in-Chief's ego is, if he could prove someone accusing him of anything to be telling lies, he'd have put that proof into the public's hands the instant he stood accused. He did not do that.
Why?
A question that will be answered if and when Trump tells the truth about the existence of tapes. Which may be never.
There are two big unanswered questions. No, one of them is not the question about possible collusion between Trump, or one of his satellites; and Russia to cause Hillary Clinton to lose the presidency. They are:
Why did 45 ask everyone else to leave the room when he admittedly spoke to James Comey?
If there are tapes, why don't you just release them and prove that you are telling the truth and Mr. Comey is the liar?
* * *
I continue to laugh at the attempt of the talking heads who attempt to defend Dishonest Donald regarding the words "I hope" that he allegedly said to Mr. Comey. When you are the ultimate authority in the "chain of command" of an employee, and you make a suggestion like that, you are engaging in exactly what James Comey said you did. You are giving "...direction." It may sound like a suggestion.
There has to have been a reason why Trump told Attorney General Jeff Sessions, among others, to leave that room. Sessions was Comey's direct report, in simple terms, his boss. Why does the boss's boss tell that boss to leave the room in order to talk to a subordinate?
Let us not forget that Dishonest Donald does not believe that any of the rules apply to him. He's lived as though he had executive privilege his entire adult life. He seems to think that the legal system is his personal club with which to attack those who stand in the way of his agenda. Yet he did something in the way Mario Puzo wrote about in his masterpiece, The Godfather.
When Amerigo Bonasera begged Don Corleone for "justice" and was told he would receive it, the Don would later tell one person what he wanted done. His acting consigliere, Tom Hagen. Hagen told one person, Peter Clemenza what to do. Clemenza told Paulie Gatto, to carry out the assault on the two youths that had raped Bonasera's daughter.
This chain of one-on-one discussions to pass on illegal instructions is designed to make certain that it can never be conclusively proven who told whom to do what. It will always become a case of "he said, he said." 45 did not want Jeff Sessions, Jared Kushner or anyone else to hear him attempt to intimidate James Comey into dropping the probe into the actions of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
* * *
As to the second question, why all the "mystery" over whether or not there are tapes of any of the conversations between the Liar-in-Chief and the former FBI director? Either there are or there aren't tapes. If they exist and they would prove the extremely unlikely event that it was Trump who was the truth-teller, why wait to release them?
Is it because there are no tapes? Seems like a very realistic possibility. As fragile as the Cheeto-in-Chief's ego is, if he could prove someone accusing him of anything to be telling lies, he'd have put that proof into the public's hands the instant he stood accused. He did not do that.
Why?
A question that will be answered if and when Trump tells the truth about the existence of tapes. Which may be never.
posted by me at 1:42 PM
<< Home