Comey is a petty idiot

Dr. Keith said:
Yes, and like most kinks they are better known through porn than through actual participation. I think you will find that greater than 90% of men over 50 have never participated in a golden shower in person and would have no concerns that their wife would assume they have while traveling on business.
Click to expand...

If you were to take a step back from Comey's response in his book... would you automatically think that Trump were concerned that his wife might believe he were engaged in golden showers... or that Trump were concerned that his wife might believe he were indulging in prostitutes?

After having slept on this, I'm leaning a bit more toward Trump being less concerned about Melania being angry about pee... than that Melania might be angry about prostitutes. And given Trump's history that is something that she might very well give some credence to prostitutes.

“He said if there’s even a 1 percent chance my wife thinks that’s true, that’s terrible,” Comey recalled. “And I remember thinking, ‘How could your wife think there’s a 1 percent chance you were with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow?’ I’m a flawed human being, but there’s literally zero chance that my wife would think that was true.”

The emphasis on the "peeing on each other" came from Comey. If you remove that particular emphasis, would you take the same position of it being so outlandish that Trump shouldn't be concerned about his wife's reaction? If it were just "How could your wife think there's a 1 percent chance you were with prostitutes in Moscow"... it takes on a bit of a different interpretation.

And I think there are a LOT of otherwise awesome famous men who would express similar concern if there were accusations of them having spent time with prostitutes while in a foreign country. That's not nearly so "beyond the pale" as the peeing element is.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Yes, and like most kinks they are better known through porn than through actual participation. I think you will find that greater than 90% of men over 50 have never participated in a golden shower in person and would have no concerns that their wife would assume they have while traveling on business.

Two girls one cup does not make all viewers run off to see if they can do that, too.
Click to expand...

So you are saying it makes some viewers run off to see if they can do that ? :eye-poppi
 
Emily's Cat said:
If you were to take a step back from Comey's response in his book... would you automatically think that Trump were concerned that his wife might believe he were engaged in golden showers... or that Trump were concerned that his wife might believe he were indulging in prostitutes?

After having slept on this, I'm leaning a bit more toward Trump being less concerned about Melania being angry about pee... than that Melania might be angry about prostitutes. And given Trump's history that is something that she might very well give some credence to prostitutes.

“He said if there’s even a 1 percent chance my wife thinks that’s true, that’s terrible,” Comey recalled. “And I remember thinking, ‘How could your wife think there’s a 1 percent chance you were with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow?’ I’m a flawed human being, but there’s literally zero chance that my wife would think that was true.”

The emphasis on the "peeing on each other" came from Comey. If you remove that particular emphasis, would you take the same position of it being so outlandish that Trump shouldn't be concerned about his wife's reaction? If it were just "How could your wife think there's a 1 percent chance you were with prostitutes in Moscow"... it takes on a bit of a different interpretation.

And I think there are a LOT of otherwise awesome famous men who would express similar concern if there were accusations of them having spent time with prostitutes while in a foreign country. That's not nearly so "beyond the pale" as the peeing element is.
Click to expand...

No, Trump was the one saying "golden shower" it was not a term Comey introduced into the conversation.
 
Emily's Cat said:
:confused: I am confused.
Click to expand...

Indeed. The quotes on this from Comey's book make it clear to me that Cheeto Mussolini is worried that his wife will think this golden shower thing is true.

But then Comey is known to lie about crowd sizes and bankruptcies, so maybe we shouldn't trust his recollection of the conversation. No wait, that's Trump. Comey has been pretty truthful about facts whether you like what he is saying or not.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Indeed. The quotes on this from Comey's book make it clear to me that Cheeto Mussolini is worried that his wife will think this golden shower thing is true.
Click to expand...
Thus my asking which quote. Because the only one I've seen (and included in the post to which you responded) doesn't include that in what Trump says. The emphasis was included in Comey's recollection of his response.

Here, I shall provide it again:
“He said if there’s even a 1 percent chance my wife thinks that’s true, that’s terrible,” Comey recalled. “And I remember thinking, ‘How could your wife think there’s a 1 percent chance you were with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow?’ I’m a flawed human being, but there’s literally zero chance that my wife would think that was true.”

It matters little that Trump is a serial liar, that's not actually relevant to Comey's recollection of the event and Comey's emphasis in this case. There's not even room in this for Trump's challenges with truth to be considered.

ETA: My point here is that what makes it clear to you is solely located in Comey's emphasis of the peeing. It isn't necessarily indicate by the quote that Comey attributes to Trump. You're accepting Comey's interpretation and emphasis of the peeing in his book as what makes it clear to you what Trump was worried about. It's not anything that Trump said, it's what Comey says that makes you believe that's what Trump was worried about.

Egads, those are some tortured sentences from me.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Thus my asking which quote. Because the only one I've seen (and included in the post to which you responded) doesn't include that in what Trump says. The emphasis was included in Comey's recollection of his response.

Here, I shall provide it again:
“He said if there’s even a 1 percent chance my wife thinks that’s true, that’s terrible,” Comey recalled. “And I remember thinking, ‘How could your wife think there’s a 1 percent chance you were with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow?’ I’m a flawed human being, but there’s literally zero chance that my wife would think that was true.”

It matters little that Trump is a serial liar, that's not actually relevant to Comey's recollection of the event and Comey's emphasis in this case. There's not even room in this for Trump's challenges with truth to be considered.

ETA: My point here is that what makes it clear to you is solely located in Comey's emphasis of the peeing. It isn't necessarily indicate by the quote that Comey attributes to Trump. You're accepting Comey's interpretation and emphasis of the peeing in his book as what makes it clear to you what Trump was worried about. It's not anything that Trump said, it's what Comey says that makes you believe that's what Trump was worried about.

Egads, those are some tortured sentences from me.
Click to expand...

Cool. That isn't the only quote. Comey has done dozens of interviews and I just don't give enough of a **** about it to track down where he said that Trumpkins brought up the golden shower, not him. If you care it is out there. If you would like to take the point, you win. I am not willing to back up my claim.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Cool. That isn't the only quote. Comey has done dozens of interviews and I just don't give enough of a **** about it to track down where he said that Trumpkins brought up the golden shower, not him. If you care it is out there. If you would like to take the point, you win. I am not willing to back up my claim.
Click to expand...

I'm not worried about points.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Cool. That isn't the only quote. Comey has done dozens of interviews and I just don't give enough of a **** about it to track down where he said that Trumpkins brought up the golden shower, not him. If you care it is out there. If you would like to take the point, you win. I am not willing to back up my claim.
Click to expand...

I would like you to have this point.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/12/politics/comey-book-golden-showers/index.html

In the book, which CNN obtained Thursday, Comey wrote that Trump wanted him to prove the allegation was false in part to prove its falsehood to his wife, first lady Melania Trump.
"He brought up what he called the 'golden showers thing,'" Comey wrote.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Indeed. The quotes on this from Comey's book make it clear to me that Cheeto Mussolini is worried that his wife will think this golden shower thing is true.

But then Comey is known to lie about crowd sizes and bankruptcies, so maybe we shouldn't trust his recollection of the conversation. No wait, that's Trump. Comey has been pretty truthful about facts whether you like what he is saying or not.
Click to expand...
We should also consider that Trump was simply making up the Melania concern to disguise his own ... like, "I'm asking for a friend." That's what I think the Melania story was about.
 
logger said:
Comey just won’t shut up!

https://theconservativetreehouse.co...eopardy-with-cnn-townhall-answer/#more-148513
Click to expand...

And if you can't trust The Conservative Treehouse for legal analysis, who can you trust?

Trump's meetings with Comey were not part of the investigation. They were meetings with two people involved in the investigation, but they weren't part of the investigation. To illustrate, let us imagine that it turned out Trump said smething untrue during those meetings. Given his nature, that seems almost certain. Would Trump have committed a crime by lying to the FBI? No. At that meeting, Comey wasn't "the FBI" conducting an investigation. He was a person, meeting with another person.

If you want a slightly more credible source, try this:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018...n-double-standard-ignores-actual-lawbreakers/

It details all sorts of Democratic, or at least anti-Trump, "lawbreaking", but it has a much more important message for anyone willing to read between the lines. What's happening in Washington today is an attempt to turn normal behavior into crime. There's political motivation to turn some normal conversation into a crime. There's political motivation to force people to testify, but then to analyze what they say and if there is even the slightest discrepancy, declare that to be perjury or obstruction of justice.

It's a truly dangerous phenomenon. If the slightest bit of spin can be cast as a crime, it gives carte blanche for people in power to throw political foes in jail. That is not a positive development.

Robert Mueller is often accused of this behavior, and when all is said and done it might be true. If he issues his report and recommend and indicts politicians for engaging in normal politics, then that will be dangerous for democracy. So far, though, that hasn't happened. Republicans are worried that it might happen. Some Democrats, or at least supporters of Democrats like the ones who participate here, are eager for it to happen, but so far, it hasn't happened. Mueller is investigating, and no one yet knows what will come of it. Hopefully, it won't be a bunch of politically motivated indictments. If it is, then our democracy is in trouble. Meanwhile, though, the Republican supporters (like the folks at Conservative Treehouse) are demanding a bunch of politically motivated indictments of their own. It's not a good development.

As much as I would like to see Trump out of office, so far I haven't seen evidence of an actual crime, so he shouldn't be impeached. Unless Mueller finds something, that should be the end of it. So far, I haven't seen anything worthy of being called criminal from either side.
 
Meadmaker said:
And if you can't trust The Conservative Treehouse for legal analysis, who can you trust?
<>
If you want a slightly more credible source, try this:
Click to expand...

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to remove breach of rule 12
 
Last edited by a moderator:
varwoche said:
I'm afraid I don't assign a great deal of credence to analysis performed by "sundance".

I recommend that if you want to call out somebody for what they said, a useful first step is to quote the actual words they said. What a concept.
Click to expand...

There’s actually a video for those who cannot bring themselves to read the words of some anonymous internet poster. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom