And no, I’m not going to make fun of you again for incorrectly applying the Pelosi quote.
And no, I’m not going to make fun of you again for incorrectly applying the Pelosi quote.
Well then I won't make fun of you again for falling into The Pelosi Trap.
My reading of Julio's link tells me 2 security groups concluded no credible threat.Originally Posted by Hawk
Dimple answer?
As far as we know there were no threats to his life , which is what Trump said
You've kind of backed yourself into a corner here.
Best I can tell, Hawk is correct on the technicality and the limited import of the FOIA here (which, as a process-oriented Pharisee, I sympathize with) but 57 is right on the spirit of the matter of credible "death threats" as a justification for Pruitt's fantastic security requests being unfounded.
I think we can all agree that Trump is a liar and any sentence out of his mouth or on his Twitter feed is likely false.
FFF - BB, BB, 2B, HR, 2B, HR, 1B, BB, BB, 1B, BB, BB, HR
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
jpx7 (04-16-2018)
Uhhh...
In fairness, they corrected the mistake
The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to make sure he doesn’t get a gun.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b016a07e9f6410
Hannity, a staunch Trump supporter, has bashed the FBI’s raid on Cohen’s office, though hadn’t previously disclosed his relationship with the lawyer
Last edited by 57Brave; 04-16-2018 at 02:54 PM.
The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to make sure he doesn’t get a gun.
You're either a client or you're not. I'm assuming he's going with "not"?
When everyone is a big fat liar, it's hard to parse who's lying in a given situation. Brilliant strategy, and one that very much suits the moment.
jpx7 (04-16-2018)
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
Hannity made further comments that appear to be somewhat inconsistent with the statement he issued through Fox News. He said that he might have paid Cohen a small fee, after all, and said he did not merely assume that their conversations were privileged but rather sought assurances.
“I might have handed him 10 bucks [and said,] 'I definitely want your attorney-client privilege on this,'" Hannity said on the radio. “Something like that. I requested that privilege with him when I would ask him, 'Well, this just came up. What do you think about this? What do you think about that?'”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.979cab23e3ae
Am I missing something? What purpose does it serve to claim Hannity as a client? Why would he and Cohen consider such a claim worth the embarassment and possible loss of job/income?
Last edited by nsacpi; 04-16-2018 at 05:29 PM.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
LOL at Hannity being a client of Michael Cohen. Complains about "liberal media bias" but fails to disclose the personal lawyer of the President of the United States is also his lawyer. Just an amazingly hilarious development. Guess Hannity is taking that "state run media" to heart.
I don't see how there is an implicit bias in having the same attorney.
The weird thing is Hannity says Cohen didn't really do any work for him other than some real estate advice and was maybe billed for 10 bucks. That doesn't seem to be worth the embarasment of being named a client or taking the risk of losing job or income.
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
There's definitely a story here ... I'm just not sure what it is.
Two possibilities come to mind:
1) there is something they would prefer not get out...hence the appeal to attorney-client privilege
2) they are a couple clowns
anything else?
"I am a victim, I will tell you. I am a victim."
"I am your retribution."
Hawk (04-16-2018)
Group sex with Stormy?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
