Obama Official Admits to MSNBC She Helped Spy On Trump

[GH2001]

My problem with you is that you toss around words like "treason" and "impeachment" without any justification for either.  Those are enormous, impactful words.  You use them flippantly.  In that you're no better than Trevor Noah, that CNN mommy partsicle Don Lemon or that assflapping Bill Maher.  It makes you a part of the hysteria and my response to that is always going to be a hard right. 

YOU say he was "forced to resign."   That isn't the truth.   It's what the left wants you to believe.  He was there for one reason, a reason which no longer exists and hasn't even really been a part of the NSC.

I hate to channel Prowler here, but maybe you should do some research.  smh.

That ^^. In bold. Even a remotely small amount of paying attention to the goings on the first 3 months in the trump administration reveals this fact. He was there for a very specific reason. And did it.

[AUChizad]

My problem with you is that you toss around words like "treason" and "impeachment" without any justification for either.  Those are enormous, impactful words.  You use them flippantly.  In that you're no better than Trevor Noah, that CNN mommy partsicle Don Lemon or that assflapping Bill Maher.  It makes you a part of the hysteria and my response to that is always going to be a hard right. 

YOU say he was "forced to resign."   That isn't the truth.   It's what the left wants you to believe.  He was there for one reason, a reason which no longer exists and hasn't even really been a part of the NSC.

I hate to channel Prowler here, but maybe you should do some research.  smh.

Whut? So you're implying he just said "My job here is done. Mission accomplished. I see no reason to remain in power. Back to Breitbart I go. Ta-tah."

You're channelling Prowler alright.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CAFB_enUS688US688&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#tbs=qdr:d&q=bannon&tbm=nws&*

[AUChizad]

That ^^. In bold. Even a remotely small amount of paying attention to the goings on the first 3 months in the trump administration reveals this fact. He was there for a very specific reason. And did it.

And what, pray tell, is that specific reason that EVERYONE knew as a fact would OBVIOUSLY only require his role as National Security advisor to have the lifespan of a house fly? What is that thing that totally slipped y'all's minds to mention up until after he resigned?

[Snaggletiger]

I'm going to unmask the lot of you.

[AUChizad]

Was Flynn forced to resign in your world? Or did he also decide he had done all that he needed to do in 20 some-odd days and retire and move to Florida?

[dallaswareagle]

I'm going to unmask the lot of you.

Somehow, I don't know how, but that sounds very prevalent in the gay community. 

[Kaos]

Do you not see the IFs that precede any time your trigger-words are used by me?

Doesn't matter. 

If evidence turns up that you fuck little helpless baby seals then your activities could be construed as sealfuckuonous. You're probably also a child abuser. If the bruises on your child's knees turn out to be from abuse, that is.  You'll probably be convicted and sentenced to prison if anybody finds that dead hobo your neighbor said he saw enter your basement.  Yes. The neighbor who is pissed because your dog barks all day and dug up your flowers. 

Doesn't matter. Seal Tucker. Child abuser. Hobo killer.

[WiregrassTiger]

Was Flynn forced to resign in your world? Or did he also decide he had done all that he needed to do in 20 some-odd days and retire and move to Florida?

Hobo killer!

[Kaos]

Whut? So you're implying he just said "My job here is done. Mission accomplished. I see no reason to remain in power. Back to Breitbart I go. Ta-tah."

You're channelling Prowler alright.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CAFB_enUS688US688&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#tbs=qdr:d&q=bannon&tbm=nws&*

HAHAHA.

CNN.
Huffy Post.
in Depth
Boston Globe
LA Times
Some local fox

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA. 

Ha.

You said "forced to resign".   Hobo killer!!

I just had a member of my board of directors reassigned to a position in the field. repping the company. He wanted a more active role. I thought he could help us more there. Oh NOES!  I forced him to resign. He was remoooooved.  Oh shit!  Whatever will I do? 

 

[AUChizad]

HAHAHA.

CNN.
Huffy Post.
in Depth
Boston Globe
LA Times
Some local fox

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA. 

Ha.

You said "forced to resign".   Hobo killer!!

I just had a member of my board of directors reassigned to a position in the field. repping the company. He wanted a more active role. I thought he could help us more there. Oh NOES!  I forced him to resign. He was remoooooved.  Oh shit!  Whatever will I do? 

 

Yes. Literally every result when you google "Bannon" in the last 24 hours.

Is Brietbart anti-Steve Bannon?

http://www.breitbart.com/news/steve-bannon-removed-from-national-security-council/

Steve Bannon removed from National Security Council

Where the fuck is your source that he left of his own volition? Where's the "research" I need to do. Please educate me, professor.

This is dumber than anything Prowler has ever posted here. Let me guess, you're retroactively trolling again. Jesus...

 

[GH2001]

And what, pray tell, is that specific reason that EVERYONE knew as a fact would OBVIOUSLY only require his role as National Security advisor to have the lifespan of a house fly? What is that thing that totally slipped y'all's minds to mention up until after he resigned?

That thing - his duty - was to reveal Susan Rice for what she is. Now the NSC is in the hands of McMaster. Bannon will not be going back to Breitbart per his new role and sec clearance.....

"Bannon remains chief strategist for POTUS and an adviser on nat'l security/for. affairs. But he will not be part of NSC, per WH sources"

This isn't hard Chad. As Vinnie Jackson (yes he's on Twitter) likes to say - think of it as 4D chess.

“Susan Rice operationalized the NSC during the last administration. I was put on to ensure that it was de-operationalized,” Bannon said in a statement to the Wall Street Journal.

This Breitbart Link says "leaves".

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/05/steve-bannon-leaves-national-security-council-susan-rice-takedown/

I would expect every media outlet outside of them and foxnews to say "removed". Its politics.

Regardless - it's semantics either way. Anyone can say anything in media. What matters is why it happened, not how a headline phrases it. Flynn has nothing to do with this. Not sure why that is relevant to bannon. Start a thread about Flynn and we can talk about him too.

[GH2001]

Yes. Literally every result when you google "Bannon" in the last 24 hours.

Is Brietbart anti-Steve Bannon?

http://www.breitbart.com/news/steve-bannon-removed-from-national-security-council/
Where the fuck is your source that he left of his own volition? Where's the "research" I need to do. Please educate me, professor.

This is dumber than anything Prowler has ever posted here. Let me guess, you're retroactively trolling again. Jesus...

 

The source is HIM.

If you are saying that getting it straight from the source is dumber than prowler then I'm gonna have to say what you wrote above is dumber than prowler.

You're really overthinking this.

[Snaggletiger]

The source is HIM.

If you are saying that getting it straight from the source is dumber than prowler then I'm gonna have to say what you wrote above is dumber than prowler.

You're really overthinking this.

I liken this to what I heard recently on ESPN.  I forget which two radio hosts it was, but they played a clip from Kirk Cousins saying he absolutely did not demand a trade and that he did go to management and ask if they had plans to move him.  He was asking why then, did that very afternoon, a shoe salesman ask him why he was demanding to get out of Washington?

The two hosts all but said Cousins was lying because Chris Mortenson said his source told him Cousins demanded a trade. So, Chris Mortenson doesn't work for the Redskins, wasn't in the room during the meeting and never talked to Kirk Cousins.  But these two goobs said there was no doubt Cousins demanded a trade.  Despite the fact that Cousins himself said he didn't. 

I don't care if he did or not, just laughing my ass off because Chris Mortenson's source is more reliable than something coming straight from the horse's mouf.

[AUChizad]

 

That thing - his duty - was to reveal Susan Rice for what she is. Now the NSC is in the hands of McMaster. Bannon will not be going back to Breitbart per his new role and sec clearance.....

"Bannon remains chief strategist for POTUS and an adviser on nat'l security/for. affairs. But he will not be part of NSC, per WH sources"

This isn't hard Chad. As Vinnie Jackson (yes he's on Twitter) likes to say - think of it as 4D chess.

“Susan Rice operationalized the NSC during the last administration. I was put on to ensure that it was de-operationalized,” Bannon said in a statement to the Wall Street Journal.

What the fuck is unique to Bannon that he and only he holds the key to "exposing" Rice? How does that batty shit even remotely begin to make sense?

This Breitbart Link says "leaves".

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/05/steve-bannon-leaves-national-security-council-susan-rice-takedown/

I would expect every media outlet outside of them and foxnews to say "removed". Its politics.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/05/steve-bannon-removed-from-national-security-council.html

Steve Bannon removed from National Security Council

http://www.breitbart.com/news/steve-bannon-removed-from-national-security-council/

Steve Bannon removed from National Security Council

Regardless - it's semantics either way. Anyone can say anything in media. What matters is why it happened, not how a headline phrases it.

Guys, maybe if EVERYONE but Breitbart (and also a different link from Breitbart) is reporting the completely reasonable fact that he was REMOVED from his position rather than the insane proclamation that he just decided to step down after 75 days in the role, MAYBE Breitbart is full of shit. Hear me out, but maybe Breitbart is biased towards Steve Bannon. AND EVEN ONE OUT OF TWO BREITBART STORIES SAY HE WAS REMOVED.

Flynn has nothing to do with this. Not sure why that is relevant to bannon. Start a thread about Flynn and we can talk about him too.

Check the thread title again, buddy. Go back and read the post that steered us into this discussion. Just because Kaos cherry-picked Bannon to go full-retard about, doesn't change the questions as I asked them.

I'll post it again for you:

In response to Kaos's screeds about how it's UNPOSSIBLE!11 for there to be any possibility that the Trump administration has dirt on their hands, I ask:

Why did Michael Flynn have to resign? Because he lied to Trump and Pence? Ok. Why did he lie?

Why does he want immunity? Recall when Hillary aides were seeking immunity Trump & Flynn (and many here) were hammering on about how that concedes guilt.

And just in: Steve Bannon was just forced to resign as well. Doesn't raise an eyebrow that multiple National Security advisers are being forced to step down within 75 days of Trump's presidency?

I'm not saying this DEFINITELY means there is treasonous activity going on, but it certainly appears at least as likely that there is corruption to some degree within Trump's staff as there is from the Democrats.

It was clearly primarily about Flynn and then threw in the side question about Bannon to further support my point.

The source is HIM.

If you are saying that getting it straight from the source is dumber than prowler then I'm gonna have to say what you wrote above is dumber than prowler.

You're really overthinking this.

Susan Rice said she didn't know anything about any requests to unmask Trump officials. She also says it wasn't for political purposes. THE SOURCE IS HER!!!

And even with that said? Bannon NEVER SAYS he wasn't axed. He doesn't. You may have "read between the lines" of one Breitbart article, but not that lyin' other one. But it's not what happened. Factually.

[AUChizad]

Clearly 100% his idea, guys.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/327534-bannon-threatened-to-quit-if-removed-from-national-security-council

Bannon threatened to quit if removed from National Security Council role: report

Chief White House strategist Stephen Bannon was unhappy with the decision to remove him from his role on the National Security Council and threatened to quit, according to a new report.

The New York Times reported Wednesday evening that Bannon “resisted the move,” and threatened to resign if the change was made. But the Times said his team has denied that he ever made such a threat.

Bannon, who led Trump’s campaign in its final months, was elevated in January to a position on the NSC principals committee, drawing widespread criticism that Trump was trying to politicize the council.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and director of national intelligence had their roles downgraded in the move.

National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster has now reversed some of those changes, a move that was approved by President Trump, according to a senior White House official.
The White House downplayed the change, insisting it was not a demotion for Bannon.

The New York Times also reported that the president was frustrated with the recognition Bannon was getting for his work on the Trump administration’s agenda and was unhappy with liberals calling his top adviser “President Bannon.”

The shifting roles also restored the Joint Chiefs chairman and intelligence directors roles as “regular attendees” of the principals committee on the NSC.

[Kaos]

Clearly 100% his idea, guys.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/327534-bannon-threatened-to-quit-if-removed-from-national-security-council

 

The Hill.
New York Times.

 

How can you come off as intelligently as you sometimes do and still be such a sheep?

[Kaos]

I'm also getting a little fucking tired of shit like this:

In response to Kaos's screeds about how it's UNPOSSIBLE!11 for there to be any possibility that the Trump administration has dirt on their hands, I ask:

Screed my ass.  We don't agree.  I'm right, you're wrong but that's okay.  I accept that. You'll figure it out one day.   Certainly doesn't mean that I'm any less intelligent or perceptive than you are just because you shit your pants in a rage.  It's insulting and unnecessary. 

You're ruining the board again. 

[AUChizad]

I'm also getting a little fucking tired of shit like this:
 

Screed my ass.  We don't agree.  I'm right, you're wrong but that's okay.  I accept that. You'll figure it out one day.   Certainly doesn't mean that I'm any less intelligent or perceptive than you are just because you shit your pants in a rage.  It's insulting and unnecessary. 

You're ruining the board again.

Yes clearly of the two of us, I'm the one shitting my pants in a rage because I'm saying we don't have enough facts to conclude definitively that every Democrat in this situation is pure evil incarnate and every Republican involved is a saint.

This is the part of the playbook where you have beclowned yourself so badly you switch gears to policing my "tone". Cool.

[Kaos]

Yes clearly of the two of us, I'm the one shitting my pants in a rage because I'm saying we don't have enough facts to conclude definitively that every Democrat in this situation is pure evil incarnate and every Republican involved is a saint.

This is the part of the playbook where you have beclowned yourself so badly you switch gears to policing my "tone". Cool.

It's clear to everybody but you.   

[GH2001]

:facepalm:What the fuck is unique to Bannon that he and only he holds the key to "exposing" Rice? How does that batty shit even remotely begin to make sense?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/05/steve-bannon-removed-from-national-security-council.htmlhttp://www.breitbart.com/news/steve-bannon-removed-from-national-security-council/Guys, maybe if EVERYONE but Breitbart (and also a different link from Breitbart) is reporting the completely reasonable fact that he was REMOVED from his position rather than the insane proclamation that he just decided to step down after 75 days in the role, MAYBE Breitbart is full of shit. Hear me out, but maybe Breitbart is biased towards Steve Bannon. AND EVEN ONE OUT OF TWO BREITBART STORIES SAY HE WAS REMOVED.
Check the thread title again, buddy. Go back and read the post that steered us into this discussion. Just because Kaos cherry-picked Bannon to go full-retard about, doesn't change the questions as I asked them.

I'll post it again for you:
It was clearly primarily about Flynn and then threw in the side question about Bannon to further support my point.Susan Rice said she didn't know anything about any requests to unmask Trump officials. She also says it wasn't for political purposes. THE SOURCE IS HER!!!

And even with that said? Bannon NEVER SAYS he wasn't axed. He doesn't. You may have "read between the lines" of one Breitbart article, but not that lyin' other one. But it's not what happened. Factually.

Rice has been caught saying two different things in multiple occasions about multiple things. Bannon has given one statement about his exit from the NSC. LYIN SUSAN.

And you obviously don't know much about this guys background if you don't know why he was put in this position. Call him what you want but he's a master chess player on policy steering. I'm not sure you fully understand how the NSC functions and who can be on it.

He's still the chief strategist. That would indicate there was no animosity. Or bad blood. He's moving back to only being a strategist. That has all the markings of this being purely strategic. If there had been a skirmish or a dust up then he would be gone completely like Flynn.

You are again getting way too caught up in the semantics of the reporting. You are taking headlines and de facto op eds as gold. They are not.