- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Ruh-Roh: Interview that did not age well for Odumbf*ck....
Posted on 7/31/25 at 3:48 am
Posted on 7/31/25 at 3:48 am
Smells like a smoking gun. It’ll be interesting to see how Clapper tries to spin and squirm his way out out of this admission when he’s put under oath...
And we know now that Obama knew from the very f*cking beginning that it was all a f*cking scam predicated on Hillary‘s bought-and-paid-for lies.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. And we know now that Obama knew from the very f*cking beginning that it was all a f*cking scam predicated on Hillary‘s bought-and-paid-for lies.
This post was edited on 7/31/25 at 3:50 am
8
Posted on 7/31/25 at 4:04 am to MMauler
quote:
And we know now that Obama knew from the very f*cking beginning that it was all a f*cking scam predicated on Hillary‘s bought-and-paid-for lies.
We’ve “known” this for over 8 years. We haven’t been able to prove it, and we still can’t. This video that you think is a smoking gun is not. All it establishes is that it was Obama who asked for the assessment. It does not establish what Obama’s motivation was. I’m fairly sure what it was, but no one can prove it. He can claim that he was concerned that the the Steele Dossier was true, and that’s why he ordered it.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 4:25 am to MMauler
quote:
we know now that Obama knew from the very f*cking beginning that it was all a f*cking scam predicated on Hillary‘s bought-and-paid-for lies.
And yet, we still have people here trying to downplay this. At least a couple of them are lieyers....I mean, lawyers.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 5:40 am to KCT
quote:What's the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? One is a shyte-eating, scum-sucking bottom feeder and the other is a fish.
I mean, lawyers.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 5:59 am to MMauler
quote:
Smells like a smoking gun
A smoking gun that the head executive of the intelligence agencies (the President) directed the agencies to follow his assessment? Because that's how this can easily be spun and there isn't a legal response to that scenario.
As I've said many times before, the amount of subjectivity and opinion involved in these intelligence assessments are going to give them all enough leeway unless a smoking gun is produced that specifically and objectively shows they knew these things were not true and they were intentionally being deceptive for improper reasons.
And then, you run into the immunity/SOL issues.
And, for the retards, this isn't a defense of their actions. This is just me explaining they're all very covered legally and any prosecutions (without that smoking gun) are going to be very difficult. This is a "if you come at the King you best not miss" scenario for Trump, because trying these prosecutions, especially against Obama, and failing, would be disastrous for both Trump and MAGA (which includes any MAGA candidate running in 2028).
They are almost assuredly going to get away with it. They were too smart and covered themselves legally. Melting down and projecting random conspiracies to get the emotions about Obama riled up runs the risk of making y'all look really bad, in the end.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:00 am to SlowFlowPro
His assessment.
Lol
Lol
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:02 am to MMauler
Ooops!
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:05 am to Jbird
quote:
His assessment.
Lol
Without the "smoking gun" I referenced, how do you prove, legally, that it wasn't his assessment?
Mediums and crystal balls aren't going to be permitted as evidence of reading his mind.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:32 am to SlowFlowPro
He asked for a lie to be created.
You call it an assessment.
You call it an assessment.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:45 am to KCT
I can’t wait for Trump to use the ‘OJ Obama’ moniker. Not there with the blatant proof in the minds of the public yet, but Trump could get it going. And maybe even coerce Barack into more self incriminating responses.
Obama will never see the inside of a jail for obvious reasons but the OJ thing would stick. And both Michelle and Barry would go crazy with that kind of heat. They earned it.
Obama will never see the inside of a jail for obvious reasons but the OJ thing would stick. And both Michelle and Barry would go crazy with that kind of heat. They earned it.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:46 am to Jbird
quote:
You call it an assessment.
No
I clearly said
quote:
Because that's how this can easily be spun
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
A smoking gun that the head executive of the intelligence agencies (the President) directed the agencies to follow his assessment?
Finish the comment, Hamilton Burger -
After the Intel community had just delivered an assessment stating what?
There was nothing there. It didn't depend on your definition of 'is'. Obama's successor was in the clear.
Ooops. " I don't like this 'assessment' and refuse to report report it publicly - go make me another"
I'll take that to a grand jury, any day. Change the names, give a judge a hint, and Boasberg would have called for chargers against Trump in a heartbeat.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:52 am to Penrod
We can now prove that Obama met with Brennan in July 2016 where Brennan told him that Hillary was concocting a fraudulent scheme to implicate Trump in a bogus Russian collusion hoax. She did this within days of Comey's fraudulently clearing her of her email felonies. She did this to deflect from her own email scandal so that her comrades in the media could ignore her own criminal activity and focus on her bullshite manufactured fraudulent Russian collusion hoax.
The new documentation proves that Obama knew all about it in July 2016.
While this resurfaced interview is something we have known for years (obviously, the interview was done during Trump’s first administration while the Mueller investigation was ongoing), it shows that Obama spearheaded the fraudulent Russian collusion hoax/Operation Crossfire Hurricane months after he was told the whole scam was strictly Hillary campaign fraud to deflect from her own felonies. Obama knew.
What this interview shows is that Obama was the main person who authorized and orchestrated the entire fraudulent investigation which led to the fraudulent Mueller witchhunt. And he did this right after Trump won the election.
They all knew it was completely fraudulent. Several of the Mueller/Weinstein lawyers were Hillary sycophants who had coordinated with her campaign.
Yet, they kept the Mueller investigation open for over two years.
Why? Mueller and Weinstein knew they had nothing on Trump from the very beginning, but they were hoping that Trump would put an end into their investigation so that they could recommend that he be charged with obstruction simply for putting a halt to their $45 million fraud. When that didn’t work, they still recommended that Trump be charged with obstruction because he said "bad" things about them. Everything Trump said was true, but they didn’t like being called out for their unethical and sleazebag behavior.
The new documentation proves that Obama knew all about it in July 2016.
While this resurfaced interview is something we have known for years (obviously, the interview was done during Trump’s first administration while the Mueller investigation was ongoing), it shows that Obama spearheaded the fraudulent Russian collusion hoax/Operation Crossfire Hurricane months after he was told the whole scam was strictly Hillary campaign fraud to deflect from her own felonies. Obama knew.
What this interview shows is that Obama was the main person who authorized and orchestrated the entire fraudulent investigation which led to the fraudulent Mueller witchhunt. And he did this right after Trump won the election.
They all knew it was completely fraudulent. Several of the Mueller/Weinstein lawyers were Hillary sycophants who had coordinated with her campaign.
Yet, they kept the Mueller investigation open for over two years.
Why? Mueller and Weinstein knew they had nothing on Trump from the very beginning, but they were hoping that Trump would put an end into their investigation so that they could recommend that he be charged with obstruction simply for putting a halt to their $45 million fraud. When that didn’t work, they still recommended that Trump be charged with obstruction because he said "bad" things about them. Everything Trump said was true, but they didn’t like being called out for their unethical and sleazebag behavior.
This post was edited on 7/31/25 at 7:14 am
Posted on 7/31/25 at 6:55 am to SlowFlowPro
You jerked off the whole time you were typing that post. Clean your screen you disgusting "high IQ" retard
Posted on 7/31/25 at 7:05 am to captainFid
quote:
quote:
A smoking gun that the head executive of the intelligence agencies (the President) directed the agencies to follow his assessment?
Finish the comment, Hamilton Burger -
After the Intel community had just delivered an assessment stating what?
There was nothing there. It didn't depend on your definition of 'is'. Obama's successor was in the clear.
Ooops. " I don't like this 'assessment' and refuse to report report it publicly - go make me another"
I'll take that to a grand jury, any day. Change the names, give a judge a hint, and Boasberg would have called for chargers against Trump in a heartbeat.
I am truly surprised that our resident legal scholar is actively avoiding answering this question.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 7:11 am to captainFid
quote:
After the Intel community had just delivered an assessment stating what?
Something different than the assessment of the head of the agency.
quote:
" I don't like this 'assessment' and refuse to report report it publicly - go make me another"
He's the head of the agencies. That's literally within his power.
quote:
'll take that to a grand jury, any day.
Even if you got the indictment, this would be dismissed via immunity.
The question is how much qualified/quasi-immunity the underlings have, or just regular cover following orders from the President.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 7:11 am to Screaming Viking
quote:
I am truly surprised that our resident legal scholar is actively avoiding answering this question.
I just didn't see it. I've been elsewhere. I have, now.
There wasn't anything of substance in his post, regardless.
Posted on 7/31/25 at 7:21 am to MMauler
You offer up one get out of jail free card to one of those smug bastards and use it to topple that soft coup attempt. Yes they get out of jail but they would be completely disgraced, earning capabilities diminished and legacy destroyed as well as their family name with it forever known as a traitor
Posted on 7/31/25 at 7:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I referenced, how do you prove, legally, that it wasn't his assessment?
Define your use if assessment? Do you mean it was a general assessment? Or, are you saying it was an official intelligence assessment that was the basis for action. And that Assessment, in your hypo was Obama’s?
Posted on 7/31/25 at 7:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He's the head of the agencies. That's literally within his power.
quote:
Something different than the assessment of the head of the agency.
Damn you admitted it.
Based on your hypothetical, Obama made the decision, initiated action, and did it with knowledge that it was counter to the intelligence being reported to him.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News