Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Recorded Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
See post #4 - FIVR claims Comey is the one person responsible for Trump's election. In order for that to be true, Comey must be 100% blameworthy and Hillary 0% blameworthy, which in turn means Hillary herself must have run a flawless political campaign but for Comey.



FIVR claimed Comey is the one person responsible for the election of Trump. I contend at least one person other than Comey is responsible for contributing to Hillary's loss.

Question #1: Which of us is right, FIVR or me?

Yes, in support of my position I gave as an example that Hillary violated a policy by using a private server and that she made at least one political blunder in how she handled the situation when her opponents attempted to use that to argue she is a criminal. Using that example does not in any way require me to argue or prove that Hillary deserves to be in jail to be correct. Heck, I don't even have to argue or prove that Hillary herself made a mistake to be correct.

Here's a different example: Hilary's opponents other than Comey used a variety of false and misleading claims in their efforts to gain votes. If they had not done so, there would have been no letter for Comey to write. Therefore, Hillary's opponents other than Comey are > 0% to blame for her loss and Comey is < 100% to blame.

Why are you making this about Hillary? It's not & it never was. The only reason Rosenstein recommended firing Comey was Comey usurping the DoJ in his famous speech. That's it. The content of the speech was immaterial. Here it is-

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...s/document-White-House-Fires-James-Comey.html

On the heels of that Trump said on national TV that he fired Comey over the Russia thing.

It's been about which Trump version to believe ever since. It's why we have a Special Counsel at all. The rest of it, the raving over the Steele memo, Nunes' antics, firing McCabe, attacking Sessions & Rosenstein & the rest of it is all designed to discredit those efforts. This propaganda effort foisted off on the NYT is no different. Shame on them for falling for it.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
See post #4 - FIVR claims Comey is the one person responsible for Trump's election. In order for that to be true, Comey must be 100% blameworthy and Hillary 0% blameworthy, which in turn means Hillary herself must have run a flawless political campaign but for Comey.



FIVR claimed Comey is the one person responsible for the election of Trump. I contend at least one person other than Comey is responsible for contributing to Hillary's loss.

Question #1: Which of us is right, FIVR or me?

Yes, in support of my position I gave as an example that Hillary violated a policy by using a private server and that she made at least one political blunder in how she handled the situation when her opponents attempted to use that to argue she is a criminal. Using that example does not in any way require me to argue or prove that Hillary deserves to be in jail to be correct. Heck, I don't even have to argue or prove that Hillary herself made a mistake to be correct.

Here's a different example: Hilary's opponents other than Comey used a variety of false and misleading claims in their efforts to gain votes. If they had not done so, there would have been no letter for Comey to write. Therefore, Hillary's opponents other than Comey are > 0% to blame for her loss and Comey is < 100% to blame.

You’re being pedantic.
 

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
That may be taking things a bit too literally.

That is a reasonable opinion, and had that been the first response rather than a personal attack we would have had a much shorter discussion.

HurleyBird said:
There are also two different interpretations you can make regarding "blame" here. For instance, is the straw that broke the camel's back 100% to blame for said injury? Depends on how you look at it.

And that is an interesting argument. If Trump won by one vote, I don't think it would be fair to state the last person to physically cast a vote has the sole blame. However, it is a better argument for something like the VPs tie break vote in the Senate. Here, Comey had some idea of how close the election was but not complete knowledge (polls were a bit too optimistic) so it falls somewhere between those situations.

However, I suspect Comey doesn't quite qualify as a straw that broke the camel's back. Some of the states went Trump by less than 1%. I suspect there were some disgruntled Bernie supporters that could have overcome that deficit who didnt bother to vote , but i don't have a reasonable way to prove that.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
That is a reasonable opinion, and had that been the first response rather than a personal attack we would have had a much shorter discussion.



And that is an interesting argument. If Trump won by one vote, I don't think it would be fair to state the last person to physically cast a vote has the sole blame. However, it is a better argument for something like the VPs tie break vote in the Senate. Here, Comey had some idea of how close the election was but not complete knowledge (polls were a bit too optimistic) so it falls somewhere between those situations.

However, I suspect Comey doesn't quite qualify as a straw that broke the camel's back. Some of the states went Trump by less than 1%. I suspect there were some disgruntled Bernie supporters that could have overcome that deficit who didnt bother to vote , but i don't have a reasonable way to prove that.

It's not about the election, either, given that all these events occurred afterwards.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
28,678
40,015
136
Yep, it is definitely all hands on deck in this final couple yards for them. The 40 year struggle to re-subjugate women's bodies by law is nearly successful, but the defense is mounting. If it doesn't finish before the mid-terms they are screwed.

It's almost like they should have gone with someone who doesn't lie and doesn't have any skeletons in the closet. Like, I don't know, Kennedy?
 

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
Yep, it is definitely all hands on deck in this final couple yards for them. The 40 year struggle to re-subjugate women's bodies by law is nearly successful, but the defense is mounting. If it doesn't finish before the mid-terms they are screwed.

It's almost like they should have gone with someone who doesn't lie and doesn't have any skeletons in the closet. Like, I don't know, Kennedy?

Kavanaugh was the required pick. Kennedy wouldn't have stepped down unless he had gotten the deal he wanted (which was his clerk, Kavanaugh, being Trump's pick). Seems a lot of people don't remember who started this whole thing. Anthony Kennedy isn't dead, he's happily golfing and drinking cognac in his government-supplied mansion as he watches the country burn. All by choice, his choice.

Justice Kennedy sold out America for his favorite rapist clerk.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
While I don’t disagree with anything here if it comes to that we have already lost. That’s a low grade civil war in progress.

It's already a low grade civil war in progress. The democrats are on the horns of a dilemma to which there is no clear answer. They either start behaving like the GOP, in which case we have two parties behaving that way, and our demise is inevitable. Or the dems can decide to take the high road, in which case we live under the rule of one party, a party whose vision is that of autocracy and oligarchy. I choose the former. The GOP can destroy America, but they cannot own it.

By 2050, I believe America will either be two or more countries, or else it will be one dystopic country where democracy is dead in all but name. So far I've not heard a single suggestion as to how our current problems can ever get any better, so I'm in the process of accepting the grim reality that the country I grew up in is dying.
 

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
You’re being pedantic.

I disagree. At this point, that level of explanation was necessary and reasonable. I called out someone for giving Rosenstein credit for something I don't think he would want credit for and for attributing an amount of blame to Comey that I felt was beyond reasonable as an exaggeration. With regard to the latter, I fully expected there to be a quick aside in which FIVR acknowledged his statement went too far (or maybe I would just be ignored entirely) and we all could have moved on. (I note that in fact, FIVR providing information clarifying his first position and ignored the latter). In the interim, however, my intelligence was attacked, and when I responded to that, other people joined in attempting to discredit me by attributing to me a Hillary-hatred intended to characterize me as a person who ignores facts in favor of personal belief. This continued despite my explanation that I was making a very limited, fact-based argument.

You then made a comment that was very similar to my original post - you accused me of making a statement that seemed like a gross exaggeration. In this case, however, my statement was literally true, and I presumed that your error in accusing me of a gross exaggeration was because you hadn't been involved in the conversation since the beginning. I realize this another lengthy explanation that might seem pedantic. I assure you that is not my intent. Based on prior experience I believe you are a person who will be capable of understanding my position and that you might appreciate the explanation.

Why are you making this about Hillary?
. . .


Like I said, this isn't about Hillary. Conservatives will make anything about Hillary every chance they get when the topic at hand is uncomfortable for them.

It's not about the election, either, given that all these events occurred afterwards.

I did not make this about Hillary or the election. I responded to post #4, which blamed Comey for Hillary's loss in the election. Hillary die-hards then jumped to her defense by defending her against accusations I didn't even make.

With you, however, I don't know why I bother to explain. You'll see what you want to regardless of what I say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starbuck1975

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,581
50,768
136
It's already a low grade civil war in progress.

I guess that’s a question of definitions. My definition involved likely more violence but I get your point.

The democrats are on the horns of a dilemma to which there is no clear answer. They either start behaving like the GOP, in which case we have two parties behaving that way, and our demise is inevitable. Or the dems can decide to take the high road, in which case we live under the rule of one party, a party whose vision is that of autocracy and oligarchy. I choose the former. The GOP can destroy America, but they cannot own it.

This is the intractable problem I see too. You’re totally right. It’s asymmetric warfare because in the end the GOP doesn’t actually care about our system. The Democrats can either sink to their level, at which point the system is destroyed, or they can stick to being responsible and be systematically removed from power by a minority that doesn’t care. What’s sad about this is I bet the vast majority of GOP voters, when confronted with the consequences of their actions, will regret it.

By 2050, I believe America will either be two or more countries, or else it will be one dystopic country where democracy is dead in all but name. So far I've not heard a single suggestion as to how our current problems can ever get any better, so I'm in the process of accepting the grim reality that the country I grew up in is dying.

While 40 years is a long time I find it unlikely America will split up. Countries just don’t do that much these days. I think your second idea is far more likely.

As for how it gets better, I don’t know either. To me the problem is the one that Mann and Ornstein recognized, that conservatives do not accept the validity of their political opposition because they put trive before country and liberals don’t. I don’t know how to fix that.
 

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
Kavanaugh was the required pick. Kennedy wouldn't have stepped down unless he had gotten the deal he wanted (which was his clerk, Kavanaugh, being Trump's pick). Seems a lot of people don't remember who started this whole thing. Anthony Kennedy isn't dead, he's happily golfing and drinking cognac in his government-supplied mansion as he watches the country burn. All by choice, his choice.

Justice Kennedy sold out America for his favorite rapist clerk.

Is there a source for that? That seems like an outlandish accusation that Justice Kennedy would interfere with the nomination process by conditioning his retirement on a promise to honor Kennedy's choice as replacement. If he recommended Kavanaugh that is one thing, but trying to mandate his selection would be wrong.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I did not make this about Hillary or the election. I responded to post #4, which blamed Comey for Hillary's loss in the election. Hillary die-hards then jumped to her defense by defending her against accusations I didn't even make.

While FIVR was blaming Comey for the election loss you were putting it on Hillary back on page 1, post #19. Fivr's comment was an invitation to troll & you took him up on it.

Rehashing the election is always a form of diversion, in this case away from the appalling hatchet job done against Rosenstein in the NYT.
 

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
While FIVR was blaming Comey for the election loss you were putting it on Hillary back on page 1, post #19. Fivr's comment was an invitation to troll & you took him up on it.

Rehashing the election is always a form of diversion, in this case away from the appalling hatchet job done against Rosenstein in the NYT.

He blamed Comey for Hillary's election loss. How can you honestly state with a straight-face that blaming somebody for Hillary's election is not talking about Hillary? Yes, I used an example of something Hillary did that she herself admitted was a mistake as my chosen example for why attributing sole blame to Comey is wrong. Is there somebody I should have used instead as an example at that point in time? Should I have made it about Bernie supporters not voting, or McConnell for pushing for a Hillary investigation, or Loretta Lynch meeting privately with Bill Clinton during the midst of said investigation, or Russians hacking the DNC emails to reveal bias against Bernie? I mean, I suppose those wouldn't have been horrible examples, but considering Comey was blamed for causing Hillary to lose by revealing there was an investigation of Hillary related to emails stored on a server that Hillary used, the two people most directly involved in that portion of FIVR's post were Comey and Hillary, and for obvious reasons, blaming Comey wasn't a possible way of supporting my point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starbuck1975

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
He blamed Comey for Hillary's election loss. How can you honestly state with a straight-face that blaming somebody for Hillary's election is not talking about Hillary? Yes, I used an example of something Hillary did that she herself admitted was a mistake as my chosen example for why attributing sole blame to Comey is wrong. Is there somebody I should have used instead as an example at that point in time? Should I have made it about Bernie supporters not voting, or McConnell for pushing for a Hillary investigation, or Loretta Lynch meeting privately with Bill Clinton during the midst of said investigation, or Russians hacking the DNC emails to reveal bias against Bernie? I mean, I suppose those wouldn't have been horrible examples, but considering Comey was blamed for causing Hillary to lose by revealing there was an investigation of Hillary related to emails stored on a server that Hillary used, the two people most directly involved in that portion of FIVR's post were Comey and Hillary, and for obvious reasons, blaming Comey wasn't a possible way of supporting my point.

So, you're naming more of the usual diversions to cover for the one you've been using? That's a novel approach.
 

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
Lol, me and Hillary are living rent free in Cozarkian's head.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
I guess that’s a question of definitions. My definition involved likely more violence but I get your point.

This is the intractable problem I see too. You’re totally right. It’s asymmetric warfare because in the end the GOP doesn’t actually care about our system. The Democrats can either sink to their level, at which point the system is destroyed, or they can stick to being responsible and be systematically removed from power by a minority that doesn’t care. What’s sad about this is I bet the vast majority of GOP voters, when confronted with the consequences of their actions, will regret it.

While 40 years is a long time I find it unlikely America will split up. Countries just don’t do that much these days. I think your second idea is far more likely.

As for how it gets better, I don’t know either. To me the problem is the one that Mann and Ornstein recognized, that conservatives do not accept the validity of their political opposition because they put trive before country and liberals don’t. I don’t know how to fix that.

Sadly, I have no solutions either. The solution we've been counting on, a shift in national demographics, isn't happening fast enough, and the GOP has effectively slowed down its impact by rigging the system in their favor.

I do have an observation about what has been a major contributing cause/accelerant: it's the internet, and IT in general. It's allowed all this hacking and propaganda from both foreign and domestic sources. It's accelerating the consumption and acceptance of bad information and bad ideas. It's hardening people's views, contributing immensely to our cultural and political polarization. How ironic that it may not be nukes or anything normally viewed as a "weapon" which is causing the demise of the west. It is, rather, the weaponization of information which is doing us in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaskalas

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
So, you're naming more of the usual diversions to cover for the one you've been using? That's a novel approach.

And there you have it, if I had chosen literally any other example to argue that Comey was less than 100% to blame, you and your ilk would have simply made some other accusation to avoid ever admitting a factual or analytical error.

At this point I'm satisfied that anybody with half a brain who bothers to read this thread will recognize the validity and soundness of the arguments I've raised, so I'm going to stop discussing this side topic. A large portion of me suspects that includes you, by the way, because it is really difficult to believe your internet persona could be anything other than an act for your own amusement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starbuck1975

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
Sadly, I have no solutions either. The solution we've been counting on, a shift in national demographics, isn't happening fast enough, and the GOP has effectively slowed down its impact by rigging the system in their favor.

I do have an observation about what has been a major contributing cause/accelerant: it's the internet, and IT in general. It's allowed all this hacking and propaganda from both foreign and domestic sources. It's accelerating the consumption and acceptance of bad information and bad ideas. It's hardening people's views, contributing immensely to our cultural and political polarization. How ironic that it may not be nukes or anything normally viewed as a "weapon" which is causing the demise of the west. It is, rather, the weaponization of information which is doing us in.

Could be. A lot of people would rather be told things that reaffirm their preconceived notions so they don't have to think. TV/radio made it easier for people to find media that caters to their existing beliefs and with the internet it is not only easier to find information that supports what you already believe it is also easier for people to make things up for you to believe. Which is strange, because you would think that the world wide web would make it easier for people to discover when they are being lied to rather than the other way around. But I guess that goes back to people not wanting to know the truth.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,156
18,647
146
FIVR claimed Comey is the one person responsible for the election of Trump. I contend at least one person other than Comey is responsible for contributing to Hillary's loss.

Question #1: Which of us is right, FIVR or me?

Yes, in support of my position I gave as an example that Hillary violated a policy by using a private server and that she made at least one political blunder in how she handled the situation when her opponents attempted to use that to argue she is a criminal. Using that example does not in any way require me to argue or prove that Hillary deserves to be in jail to be correct. Heck, I don't even have to argue or prove that Hillary herself made a mistake to be correct.

Here's a different example: Hilary's opponents other than Comey used a variety of false and misleading claims in their efforts to gain votes. If they had not done so, there would have been no letter for Comey to write. Therefore, Hillary's opponents other than Comey are > 0% to blame for her loss and Comey is < 100% to blame.

I'm not sure why you are even presenting this to me specifically. I never argued otherwise. I'm presenting the current state of her incarceration as it directly relates to a very large part of why Trump was elected.

Comey certainly shoulders a big part of the responsibility due to his actions at the end of October '16. To say he is solely responsible is intellectually lazy and emotionally charged, unless context is presented to change that.

Watching 8 years under Obama unfold, it's clear that the email server was just the icing on the cake of lies attacking Hilary. Many Republican voters will believe damn near anything, so the lock her up chant was easy-peasy.
 
Last edited:

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,971
13,488
136
See post #4 - FIVR claims Comey is the one person responsible for Trump's election. In order for that to be true, Comey must be 100% blameworthy and Hillary 0% blameworthy, which in turn means Hillary herself must have run a flawless political campaign but for Comey.



FIVR claimed Comey is the one person responsible for the election of Trump. I contend at least one person other than Comey is responsible for contributing to Hillary's loss.

Question #1: Which of us is right, FIVR or me?

Yes, in support of my position I gave as an example that Hillary violated a policy by using a private server and that she made at least one political blunder in how she handled the situation when her opponents attempted to use that to argue she is a criminal. Using that example does not in any way require me to argue or prove that Hillary deserves to be in jail to be correct. Heck, I don't even have to argue or prove that Hillary herself made a mistake to be correct.

Here's a different example: Hilary's opponents other than Comey used a variety of false and misleading claims in their efforts to gain votes. If they had not done so, there would have been no letter for Comey to write. Therefore, Hillary's opponents other than Comey are > 0% to blame for her loss and Comey is < 100% to blame.
Thats not logic, I dont know what it is but logic it is not.

Question #1: Which of us is right, FIVR or me?
None of you. Flawed assertions and flawed deductions.
It is the sum of many things that create a perfect storm.
 
Last edited:

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/...p-not-to-fire-anybody-after-rosenstein-report

Even Hannity likely understands that if Rosenstein made a statement about wearing a wire it wa certainly sarcasm. Firing Rosenstein would probably hand the Senate to Dems as well as increase a victory in the House. Of course that would mean absolute disaster for Trump since the firing of Mueller would then mean the Congress can hire Mueller to continue his investigation independently of the DOJ.
 

TeeJay1952

Golden Member
May 28, 2004
1,532
191
106
My entire life I have enjoyed adult conversation but after the reveals of the last election I never know if I am talking to a sock or ushanka or someone with a different opinion from mine.
Everyone need to remember we are not enemies just disagree on what and how to pay for stuff.
 

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
Thats not logic, I dont know what it is but logic it is not.

Question #1: Which of us is right, FIVR or me?
None of you. Flawed assertions and flawed deductions.
It is the sum of many things that create a perfect storm.

FALSE. I am correct. Without Comey's announcement days prior to the election we would not be in the is mess.


I believe I am not the only one who said this is the case. This theory is not mine alone.