The binary world of the Grifter-in-Chief

By now everyone has heard about the ABC interview the grifter gave during which he said he would accept dirt on his election opponent from another country, like Norway (or Russia) if it was offered. He couched it, as a good conman does, by saying he would at least listen to what they were offering.

When it was pointed out to him that the FBI director had recently said the offer of help is something that the FBI should be notified of he said the FBI director was wrong (he isn't).
https://lawandcrime.com/politics/ab...foreign-nationals-to-influence-u-s-elections/

It's not often the prez goes on the record as saying he would commit a crime if he thought it would benefit his election chances. I would venture to say it's never happened before that a prez admitted he'd commit a crime of any sort.

Sen. Mark Warner said that if the president “does not have enough of a moral compass” to understand this is wrong, “perhaps we need legislation saying that there is a duty to report such offers of assistance to law enforcement. I just can’t understand this. I think every past presidential campaign — Republican or Democrat — would have recognized that obligation.”

"I just can't understand this." Sen. Warner, allow me to explain. The lens through which self-absorbed narcissists view the world is such that if something is good for them......then it is good and therefore can't be bad, period. It doesn't matter that there are laws against foreign interference in our elections nor that the founders were concerned enough about said interference that they addressed it at the time of the Constitution's writing.
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/168788

Perhaps the ABC interview explains why it was wise for Don's lawyers to keep him from testifying with Mueller. Their concern Don would blurt out something incriminating seems to have been well founded.
.....................................................................................................................
I expect this may elicit the false equivalence to the dossier Trumpette's always make. Please spare yourself that embarrassment.

 

BTW, Don's claim he never called the FBI in his life. Not so much.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3381447-1981-File-Says-Donald-Trump-Offered-to-Fully.html

 

Holy ****, you really have become a cranky version of Columbo. Going back nearly 40 years ago. Good for you. Now go research if Trump ever took a drink of alcohol.

 

In the interview I heard, he was asked whether he would listen to what they had to say or notify the FBI, he said he would do both. Sounds like a reasonable honest answer to me.

 

LOL, I love it when the left gets played.

The DNC PAID for dirt on Trump from foreigners.

When Senator Mark Warnger spoke at length, and in great detail, about extremely negative information on Trump, with a talented entertainer purporting to be a Russian Operative, did he immediately call the FBI? NO, in fact he didn’t even tell the Senate Intelligence Committee.

When Schiff for brains took calls from another person, also very successfully purporting to be a Russian Operative, did he call the FBI, or even think to call the FBI? NO!

Rightly so, Trump again exposes the democrats hypocrisy.

 

Or.................He just proved once again you cant believe one thing this president says and does! And the GOP cheers on every lie.....

 

Even Trump’s Staunchest TV Allies Struggle With His Comments On Foreign Dirt

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-allies-struggle-foreign-dirt

Even President Donald Trump’s most dependable yes men are struggling to spin his comments on accepting foreign “oppo research” and not telling the FBI.

 

Wrong. You're almost as bad as trump. It was more like maybe or was it perhaps he would notify the FBI. It wasn't that he would notify the FBI.

 

You mean like democrats have done?

 

You are worse than Trump since you are only assuming what he said.

 

Laura Ingraham, host of Fox’s “The Ingraham Angle,” directed her ire at Trump’s staff.

“Setting aside the question of why you would have George Stephanopoulos standing over the President in the Oval Office —I don’t know who approved that — what about this notion of accepting foreign intel about an opponent?” she asked Wednesday night. “Is that a risk for President Trump, getting pulled back into Mueller? Again, why he was put in that situation is beyond me.”

Don't worry about it Laura. The Following will stick with the Orange Fraud no matter how many crimes he admits he is willing to commit. He is their Dear Leader.

 

Santorum..........."I think the President’s words, often, are I think the President’s words, often, are imprecise and not necessarily — you know, that’s why I think he didn’t want to be interviewed with Bob Mueller."

"imprecise and not necessarily"................I think truthful was the word he was thinking of but didn't say.

 

Yep. His honesty will get him in trouble.

 

Yup, like honestly admitting to committing or contemplating the commission of a crime.

 

Trump does damage control after saying he'd accept foreign help in 2020
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/trump-tweet-interference-1363403

"Every president regularly communicates with other heads of state. Accepting negative information from a foreign agent about a campaign opponent is a different matter, however. It is a crime for a campaign to solicit or accept something of value from a foreign entity, which some lawyers say could apply to information."

 

Better than using words to intentionally deceive like Bill Clinton. "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinski" (She was having sex with me). "It depends on what the meaning of the word "is"is". meaning he was not having sex with her at this exact minute. Generally, I know what Trump is saying. With Clinton, you never knew what he was covering up.

But, that is just me. .

 

The problem is that Trump never got the Presidential Rule Book. It covers stuff like:

Rule 23: Don't spit in the Oval Office, or
Rule 47: Don't play with your boys while on television, and
Rule 97: Don't write love letters to foreign dictators (at least don't brag about it), and
Rule 238: Don't admit you're a criminal in public.

 

Deflections (#56) to Clinton's now include Bill.

Your record of never addressing the question at hand remains intact.

 

Not a deflection. Just a good example. I had the same feelings about Bush. He did not always use the correct English, but I knew what he was saying.

I have been debating for a long time whether to consider your counting as a lies or just plain ignorance. You must know the number is not correct, unless of course, you kept track of up to forty, which I seriously doubt. Your choice. Ignorance or a lie?

 

Possibly but I believe little of what Trump claims. I just enjoy the fits he causes for the alt-lefties. This being case in point.

 

Your record of never addressing the question at hand remains intact.

 

Yes indeed.........You love it because thats the thinking of a child!....You could care less if your lied to , all you want is to be coddled and hear what you want to hear and if it is derogatory the better...Damn the truth, we get it....We have raised 5 year olds, and we remember!

 

Bottom line..........in Trumpworld any ethical, moral, or legal violation is justified in an effort for him to win...........unless they are done by anybody else..........then he screams bloody blue murder.

 

I did. I would rather listen to Trump than to someone who intentionally misleads.

 

Irony alert!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!