*** The Official CUCKposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

The alternate explanation assumes that Trump is guilty of collusion. It assumes that the man who has accumulated immense wealth, achieved celebrity status, and became a wildly successful politician is also monumentally stupid.

Actually, my present preferred hypothesis is that he doesn't like the investigation because it's going to turn up dirt on him that otherwise wouldn't come to light. Money-laundering with Russians is one possibility, given his history of shady dealings (Trump University being the classic example). The guy clearly hasn't been flying straight in his business life and he doesn't want to be investigated under any pretense.

It assumes that the living icon of business success fails to grasp public relations and political optics in ways that are obvious even to ordinary citizens. And it assumes that efforts to conceal his crime were undermined by an accidental confession to Lester Holt.

No, it assumes he lacks an internal censor and/or thinks he can get away with anything like he has his whole life.

Trump won because open minded independent thinkers were put off by being called mindless sheep whenever they deviated from the preferred progressive narrative.

First, referring to yourself as open-minded may be being a bit generous. Of your ~1800 posts here, none of them have ever suggested there's much if any flexibility in your opinions.

Second, if that is true of you, don't assume you're representative of his supporters.

[BananaStand]

Actually, my present preferred hypothesis is that he doesn't like the investigation because it's going to turn up dirt on him that otherwise wouldn't come to light. Money-laundering with Russians is one possibility, given his history of shady dealings (Trump University being the classic example). The guy clearly hasn't been flying straight in his business life and he doesn't want to be investigated under any pretense.

That still assumes that a very stable genius capable of the successes that Trump has enjoyed, is also stupid enough to ignore the fact that firing one guy wouldn't stop the investigation, and that it looks bad.

Whether he's guilty of Russian collusion, or of something else, it doesn't change the fact that he would have nothing to gain by firing Comey. It doesn't change the fact that firing Comey without a good reason would be stupid.

No, it assumes he lacks an internal censor and/or thinks he can get away with anything like he has his whole life.

If that's the case, why is he so worried about Comey? Does not compute. He can't be simultaneously paranoid about the FBI investigation AND confident enough to confess on television.

First, referring to yourself as open-minded may be being a bit generous. Of your ~1800 posts here, none of them have ever suggested there's much if any flexibility in your opinions.

Try using facts or logic to change my mind, not the sensational speculations of failing newspapers.

[Poopadoop]

That still assumes that a very stable genius capable of the successes that Trump has enjoyed, is also stupid enough to ignore the fact that firing one guy wouldn't stop the investigation, and that it looks bad.

Whether he's guilty of Russian collusion, or of something else, it doesn't change the fact that he would have nothing to gain by firing Comey. It doesn't change the fact that firing Comey without a good reason would be stupid.

So when Nixon did it, that proved he was too dumb to be president?

[BananaStand]

So when Nixon did it, that proved he was too dumb to be president?

You're being intentionally stubborn, or stupid here. That was not the same thing. Nixon's taped conversations were under subpeona, he really didn't have another play at that point.

Trump was under no such pressure to fire Comey.

It's also worth noting that Nixon didn't have to contend with a 24 hour news cycle on 25 different TV stations and a deep state leaking his every move to the press. So he probably thought he could get away with it.

A guilty Trump could not make the same assumption. 1) He has less privacy than Nixon and 2) He can ask google "what happened when Nixon did this"?

[Poopadoop]

You're being intentionally stubborn, or stupid here. That was not the same thing. Nixon's taped conversations were under subpeona, he really didn't have another play at that point.

Trump was under no such pressure to fire Comey.

It's also worth noting that Nixon didn't have to contend with a 24 hour news cycle on 25 different TV stations and a deep state leaking his every move to the press. So he probably thought he could get away with it.

A guilty Trump could not make the same assumption. 1) He has less privacy than Nixon and 2) He can ask google "what happened when Nixon did this"?

If Trump was guilty, what would be his play then? Wait for the inevitable subpoena and then start firing people?

[BananaStand]

If Trump was guilty, what would be his play then? Wait for the inevitable subpoena and then start firing people?

If Trump was guilty, you would know by now.

If Trump was guilty, his play would be to delay as much as possible. I assume, I don't know for sure because I'm not an arch-criminal. I assume his SOP would be to deflect attention from the investigation whenever possible. He seems to be doing the opposite. If Trump was guilty, then Mueller would still be waiting to talk to Bannon, Kushner, Spicer, Preibus, Sessions, and others.

EDIT: He would also be playing the "But Hillary was worse" card ALOT stronger. He could lock her up tomorrow if he really wanted to.

[Poopadoop]

If Trump was guilty, you would know by now.

First, we don't know what he's possibly guilty of. That's one thing.

Second, just because they don't find the smoking gun on day one or week one or year one of the investigation doesn't mean they have nothing and are just farting around wasting taxpayer money. Plenty of investigations take longer than this one and end up proving someone guilty. So sorry, but there's no time limit on how long they get to uncover the evidence, where if it takes longer than 'x' you get to conclude the person must be innocent.

If Trump was guilty, his play would be to delay as much as possible.

How might he go about that? Assuming of course that's a good strategy. And in what way has he been doing the opposite?

I assume his SOP would be to deflect attention from the investigation whenever possible.
He seems to be doing the opposite.

Or it could be to try to discredit it in any way possible, which is exactly the opposite.

If Trump was guilty, then Mueller would still be waiting to talk to Bannon, Kushner, Spicer, Preibus, Sessions, and others.

How do you know he isn't? Also, what's your interpretation of Mueller wanting to interview Trump himself? Just wanting to shoot the breeze?

EDIT: He would also be playing the "But Hillary was worse" card ALOT stronger. He could lock her up tomorrow if he really wanted to.

Ya because that's what every arch-criminal says - sure I'm a criminal but so-and-so was worse. Lock THEM up, not me! Lol, right.

Basically, your argument starts out with 'he's innocent' and tries to see everything through that prism. I'm not saying he's guilty, but you already have the case decided in your mind based on whatever theories happen to suit.

Let's just see what happens.

[Poopadoop]

Try using facts or logic to change my mind

You already know the facts so there's no point trying really.