Trump Admits that He Fired Comey Because of Russia

[Father Heathen]

WTC 7 wasn't hit by an airplane. It had a couple small fires, 99% of it's windows even appear intact when it collapsed demolition style, visible demolition exposions coming out the side. Then you have the owner of the building Larry Goldstein saying "they decided to pull it" which is demolition talk for a demolition. But demolition is not part of the official story. I believe they say debris from the other trade centers damaged it and it collapsed. But it looked in fairly good condition to me.

Willful ignorance is a form of dishonesty, and dishonesty is a sin, so drop to your knees, boy, and pray for forgiveness.

 

[Father Heathen]

Do you know how a story can be told without any evidence of that story ever happening the way it's being told?

Here's an experiment that we learned as children at a birthday party. We all got in a line and the first one in line told a story to the person next in the line Then that person told the same story to the one standing next to that person. By the time the last person tells the story to all the kids in the line, the story was completely different than the first person who told the story.

This is how liars work in this world.

Except for, you know, evidence.

 

[eldios]

Except for, you know, evidence.

I guess you didn't understand the story experiment I learned as a child. Never trust a story or simply sit back and enjoy them knowing there's no truth in any of them.

 

[Father Heathen]

I guess you didn't understand the story experiment I learned as a child. Never trust a story or simply sit back and enjoy them knowing there's no truth in any of them.

I got it, and what I'm saying is that there is a big difference between hearsay and verifiable evidence. Besides, if you truly believed in what you're saying, you would toss your bible in the trash.

 

[Falvlun]

I guess you didn't understand the story experiment I learned as a child. Never trust a story or simply sit back and enjoy them knowing there's no truth in any of them.

But some of this is coming from Trump himself, claiming that his firing of Comey was in part due to the "Russia thing" and that, yes, he did share codeword protected intel with the Russians.

Some other things have been confirmed, such as Flynn inappropriately talking with the Russians and that the Trump administration had been warned of security concerns regarding Flynn.

As for claiming that there is no truth to any of the stories, that is just as incorrect as claiming that all stories are true. The actual skeptical position would be that we don't know whether they are true or false.

However, we also know that there are multiple FBI investigations, as well as those in Congress. This doesn't prove guilt, but it does demonstrate that there is something to these stories that needs to be cleared up.

 

[Falvlun]

WTC 7 wasn't hit by an airplane. It had a couple small fires, 99% of it's windows even appear intact when it collapsed demolition style, visible demolition exposions coming out the side. Then you have the owner of the building Larry Goldstein saying "they decided to pull it" which is demolition talk for a demolition. But demolition is not part of the official story. I believe they say debris from the other trade centers damaged it and it collapsed. But it looked in fairly good condition to me.

The debris from the Twin Towers damaged the building and started the fires, but the reports state that the damage did not cause the collapse. The fires did by weakening the support girders.

"The fire expanded the girders of the building, causing some to lose their structural integrity. This led column number 79, a critical column supporting a large part of the 13th floor, to buckle, causing the floors above it to collapse to the fifth floor; however, this could not be seen from outside the building. The structure also developed cracks in the facade just before the entire building started to fall."

And:
"With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled – pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, which were fueled by office contents and burned for 7 hours, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse."

We are not talking "small fires", as you stated:

"Over the course of the day, fires burned out of control on several floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building.[35][36]:4 During the afternoon, the fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30.[31]:24 (PDF p. 28) In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.[7]"

What about any evidence for demolition?

"The NIST report found no evidence supporting the conspiracy theories that 7 World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition. Specifically, the window breakage pattern and blast sounds that would have resulted from the use of explosives were not observed."

Wiki source

So, why should I ignore all this in favor of "well, it looks like a demolition"? Besides having no evidence, It still suffers from my previous criticism: What of other modes of destruction can also appear like a demolition?

 

[fantome profane]

Here's an experiment that we learned as children at a birthday party. We all got in a line and the first one in line told a story to the person next in the line Then that person told the same story to the one standing next to that person. By the time the last person tells the story to all the kids in the line, the story was completely different than the first person who told the story.

hmmm, maybe that is why it is a good thing Comey wrote things down immediately after they happened.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

As someone who believes 9/11 was an inside job, yes I believe Comey deserves to be fired.

Do you think 9/11 was Comey's doing?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Obviously they didn't, so, thankfully, Hillary is still living in NY instead of DC.

You narrowly dodged a bullet there. As president, if she continued to use unsecured servers, some of her comfort food recipes might be in Russian hands as we speak.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I hear that the stones are coming to your home town soon. Boulder Colorado? No problema.

I'm predicting that you will soon be coming out of the closet flaming at the whim of a major stoner and big rock fan from way back.

Wait for it: Jehovah salutes those who he is about to rock. Hope you like to barbecue, Mr. Trump. I guarantee that your date will be smoking hot. Consider yourself fired.

Why?

Because you don't Rick-roll the creator of the universe..

 

[Kemosloby]

Do you think 9/11 was Comey's doing?

Don't know but as the head of FBI he didn't spend any time finding who's it was.

 

[Kemosloby]

Willful ignorance is a form of dishonesty, and dishonesty is a sin, so drop to your knees, boy, and pray for forgiveness.

Those are all lame. I know it's pointless to argue with you about them. But I'll do one, I did bring up Silverstein saying to "pull it" , If he meant pull the firefighters wouldn't he have said "pull them", Either way, you still have a building collapsing for no apparent reason, never hit by an airplane, appeared to be mostly intact, minor damage and only a few small fires in WTC 7. Nothing that could make the building implode....

 

[Kemosloby]

The debris from the Twin Towers damaged the building and started the fires, but the reports state that the damage did not cause the collapse. The fires did by weakening the support girders.

"The fire expanded the girders of the building, causing some to lose their structural integrity. This led column number 79, a critical column supporting a large part of the 13th floor, to buckle, causing the floors above it to collapse to the fifth floor; however, this could not be seen from outside the building. The structure also developed cracks in the facade just before the entire building started to fall."

And:
"With a loss of lateral support across nine floors, column 79 buckled – pulling the east penthouse and nearby columns down with it. With the buckling of these critical columns, the collapse then progressed east-to-west across the core, ultimately overloading the perimeter support, which buckled between Floors 7 and 17, causing the remaining portion of the building above to fall downward as a single unit. The fires, which were fueled by office contents and burned for 7 hours, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse."

We are not talking "small fires", as you stated:

"Over the course of the day, fires burned out of control on several floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building.[35][36]:4 During the afternoon, the fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30.[31]:24 (PDF p. 28) In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.[7]"

What about any evidence for demolition?

"The NIST report found no evidence supporting the conspiracy theories that 7 World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition. Specifically, the window breakage pattern and blast sounds that would have resulted from the use of explosives were not observed."

Wiki source

So, why should I ignore all this in favor of "well, it looks like a demolition"? Besides having no evidence, It still suffers from my previous criticism: What of other modes of destruction can also appear like a demolition?

A demolition is about the only thing that makes a building implode into its footprint. It's no random thing, it's like a science.

 

[Father Heathen]

Either way, you still have a building collapsing for no apparent reason, never hit by an airplane, appeared to be mostly intact, minor damage and only a few small fires in WTC 7. Nothing that could make the building implode....

A demolition is about the only thing that makes a building implode into its footprint. It's no random thing, it's like a science.

Yet again, the videos thoroughly address both of these points. But I imagine that someone who considers the Pope to be some sort of nefarious super villain bent on world domination would have little interest in facts and reality.

 

[eldios]

I got it, and what I'm saying is that there is a big difference between hearsay and verifiable evidence. Besides, if you truly believed in what you're saying, you would toss your bible in the trash.

I don't need to use the Bible when I speak for our Creator. But when a liar tries to use the scriptures to force me to believe their lies, then I use the scriptures to show them that they are liars.

 

[Kemosloby]

Yet again, the videos thoroughly address both of these points. But I imagine that someone who considers the Pope to be some sort of nefarious super villain bent on world domination would have little interest in facts and reality.

Look at the building. I mean I heard Silverstein say "pull it" , which is a term for a demolition. Then look at the building, never hit by an airplane, implode into it's footprint in a matter of seconds. You only ever see anything like that in demolitions.

https://video.search.yahoo.com/sear...03745a803099ca31132e98a803bbf8b3&action=click

 

[eldios]

hmmm, maybe that is why it is a good thing Comey wrote things down immediately after they happened.

It doesn't matter whether you write your story down on paper or memorize it. It's still just a story with no actual proof that Trump said anything. Anyone can lie so don't expect Comey to be a truth teller. Only us servants of God can speak for the Truth.

 

[fantome profane]

It doesn't matter whether you write your story down on paper or memorize it. It's still just a story with no actual proof that Trump said anything. Anyone can lie so don't expect Comey to be a truth teller. Only us servants of God can speak for the Truth.

But at least we know that the story Comey told and recorded shortly after each meeting with Trump will be the same story he will tell when he testifies before congress, and it will be the same story when it appears in the book that will inevitably be written. Unlike the stories that come out of the Whitehouse that change from one moment to the next.

 

[eldios]

But at least we know that the story Comey told and recorded shortly after each meeting with Trump will be the same story he will tell when he testifies before congress, and it will be the same story when it appears in the book that will inevitably be written. Unlike the stories that come out of the Whitehouse that change from one moment to the next.

Comey has already testified under oath three months after he supposedly wrote that note that no one has ever asked him to stop the investigation for POLITICAL reasons. There's nothing wrong for a President of the U.S. to question his elected FBI director whether he is under investigation or anyone else for that matter. Trump was not acting out for political reasons.

 

[leibowde84]

I don't think it's "fake news," but merely repeating what amounts to rumor and speculation doesn't really give us anything solid to go on.

If that was the case I'd agree, but Spicer basically confirmed it. Plus, they confirmed what Trump said with multiple sources. It's not like they take one person's word for it.