I've read the reporting, where can I read the actual text message conversation?

2/7/2018 5:15:14 PM

I don't believe they are posted anywhere.

2/7/2018 5:17:51 PM

why didnt they smash the phones with hammers like hillary did? amateurs

2/7/2018 6:08:28 PM

It was bs as has been reported everywhere.

Ron Johnson is a fucking idiot. That’s twice in a week he’s created stories as a bad faith actor.

2/7/2018 7:48:09 PM

still the main story on foxnews.com

2/7/2018 8:49:18 PM

So the text was sent on 9/2/2016 which was after the FBI had closed it's investigation into Clinton. The message in context was Obama wanting a briefing on the investigation into Russian meddling. 9/2/2016 was just days before Obama confronted Putin.

So +credibility for wanting to be informed on an important issue to confront an adversary

2/8/2018 7:00:35 AM

+2 credibility for never having 2 members of his staff resign in the same week for beating their wives

2/10/2018 8:41:05 AM

dtownral, your comment.....I want to laugh at it, but it is so sad as well.

2/10/2018 9:37:22 AM

Artist who painted President Obama's portrait also painted portraits of black women holding severed white women's heads...

http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/obama-artist-paints-black-women-holding-severed-white-heads/

I wish tww had the pop corn emoticon. That would be useful right now.

2/12/2018 10:31:21 PM

And?? What's your point?

2/12/2018 11:17:01 PM

^It will be interesting to see what will happen if President Trump finds an artist to do his portrait who likes to paint photos of white people murdering black people.

2/12/2018 11:54:25 PM

LOL maybe you should google "Holofernes" in the title of the painting before saying very dumb things.

But Trump has already called Mexicans rapists, he routinely tweets that immigrants are dangerous, he called Nazis fine people, his admin has cut funding for reducing investigations to white nationalists despite terrorist attacks by white nationalists being on the rise.

You're trying to dumbly imply using dumb-person reasoning that the Obama portrait artist is racist, but we all know Trump is racist by both his words and deeds.

2/13/2018 12:03:25 AM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_beheading_Holofernes

would never click a link to wnd, so I’m going to assume that the link posted has a few paragraphs dedicated to the piece referenced and the context behind it

2/13/2018 12:10:12 AM

^^Not really saying he's racist, but if the reverse was done it would look like America was hit with a nuclear bomb by the time the protest and outrage was over.

2/13/2018 12:14:02 AM

Trump went on TV and literally called Mexicans rapists-- and was elected president.

White people ACTUALLY beheaded blacks and lynched them for decades, after enslaving them, and it earned them 10x the family wealth than black families (and now some states have laws protecting statues of the perpetrators).

It's a pretty tone deaf and idiotic to bring up a hypothetical

bUT wHaT If trUmP wAs PAIntEd bY A rAcIST

2/13/2018 12:31:46 AM

Getting butt hurt over modern paintings that reference Renaissance art is grade A angry white guy.

2/13/2018 8:48:13 AM

When I think of Presidential portraits, I think of solemn, gray portraits. The only one that really seems to stand out was JFKs unfinished portrait. So it was strange to see Obama's was so untraditional. It probably will age well, and in 20 years be remembered as one of the better portraits. But for now, I wouldn't even hang it in my bathroom.

Michelle's portrait was clearly of another person. Who knows.

2/13/2018 9:05:37 AM

it's definitely not her face


i really like obama's portrait, but reddit improved it: https://i.imgur.com/0yyhETy.jpg

2/13/2018 9:31:41 AM

lmao

2/13/2018 9:42:38 AM

https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/963466609473081345

And now this.

2/13/2018 12:46:19 PM

"secret sperm" is definitely a phrase i didn't think i would read today

2/13/2018 12:49:01 PM

"Let them eat...Blue Apron?"

2/13/2018 12:52:23 PM

2/13/2018 4:23:05 PM

Where is the sperm? I'm not seeing it.

2/13/2018 4:24:14 PM

Secret sorry on the right side of the forehead near hairline

See it in this close up

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/963469287330664450

[Edited on February 13, 2018 at 4:50 PM. Reason : ]

2/13/2018 4:40:01 PM

This describes what online right wing racist trolls are doing to the portraits:

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/02/13/sean-hannity-and-other-conservatives-suggest-obama-portraits-are-sexually-perverted/23360769

And if you can stomach it, see it here:

https://thegrio.com/2018/02/13/michelle-obama-portrait-racist/

Sick sick people.

[Edited on February 13, 2018 at 5:25 PM. Reason : ]

2/13/2018 5:23:19 PM

https://twitter.com/jessefferguson/status/969201651381948416

Obamacare just hit its highest level of approval, with a majority of Americans approving of it

3/2/2018 12:18:33 AM

a majority of 1200 Americans approving it

3/2/2018 2:41:50 AM

THEY NEVER POLLED ME!!1?

3/2/2018 8:26:35 AM

This guy. Obama. He was the greatest president I think we've had since Lincoln.

There TGL. Happy?

3/2/2018 10:17:09 AM

Meanwhile...

http://news.gallup.com/poll/186527/americans-government-health-plans-satisfied.aspx

3/2/2018 11:08:00 AM

I’d love to see the cross section of the 41% who are happy with the health system who have no insurance. They are either self-hating or healthy conservatives who would cry the second they got sick.

3/2/2018 11:37:07 AM

^^^

3/2/2018 12:19:51 PM

This is kinda random, but Obama has on a few occasions given his opinion regarding Trump, Trump's policies, the current tone of the WH, etc, and I see people like the talking heads losing their mind, saying things like "OMG, so below former presidents, look at Bush's decorum, he shouldn't be giving his opinion, etc, etc."

Anybody aware of Wilson's bid for reelection? Teddy Roosevelt was pissed off that we weren't in the war yet, and he actively campaigned - everywhere that he could be heard, against a sitting president. I mean he was vehemently against Wilson.

How quickly we like to forget historical points that don't agree with our narrative. I say quickly, it's been 102 years, but still...

3/26/2018 11:50:41 AM

the talking heads making that argument don’t deserve to be taken seriously

3/26/2018 11:55:08 AM

1) Obama had one of the most divisive presidencies in American history. It's no surprise that people get worked up when he gives his opinion. Look at how people reacted when he released his NCAA brackets.

2) Talking heads are paid to make this an issue. It's up to you to realize that it isn't.

3/26/2018 12:06:08 PM

Lol.

3/26/2018 12:17:36 PM

lol I was about to reply, "Remember when those same talking heads criticized Barack Obama for being divisive?"

3/26/2018 12:18:10 PM

Quote :

"Look at how people reacted when he released his NCAA brackets."

go on...

3/26/2018 12:19:55 PM

Quote :

"1) Obama had one of the most divisive presidencies in American history. It's no surprise that people get worked up when he gives his opinion. Look at how people reacted when he released his NCAA brackets."

The last sentence exposes the lack of credibility of the first sentence. I mean, look, if you're even outraged by his NCAA brackets, the problem isn't the president, the problem is you.

3/26/2018 1:18:47 PM

Quote :

"Look at how peopleconservatives reacted when he released his NCAA brackets."

Didn't they lose their shit because he should've been concentrating on being President rather than taking a few minutes to fill out a bracket? Because, if so, I'd like to know what those same people say about our current President spending practically 1/3 of this presidency so far at one of his golf courses.

[Edited on March 26, 2018 at 1:24 PM. Reason : ]

3/26/2018 1:23:21 PM

Welp, the disastrous Iran deal is now up in flames. Seriously, will there be any evidence of an Obama presidency after the next 3 years?

5/8/2018 2:56:19 PM

Destabilize the Middle East even more with zero plan in place to own the libs.

5/8/2018 3:01:29 PM

Those liberal tears are gonna be so tasty when we are all paying $6 for a gallon of gas.

5/8/2018 3:04:01 PM

Quote :

"Welp, the disastrous Iran deal is now up in flames."

in what ways was it disastrous?

5/8/2018 3:10:40 PM

sitting in my chair, warming my feet by some freshly enriched uranium from iran, sipping my warm cup of liberal tears

5/8/2018 3:53:02 PM

+ credibility

Quote :

"THE OFFICE OF BARACK OBAMA FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEMay 08, 2018 Statement from President Barack Obama on the JCPOA There are few issues more important to the security of the United States than the potential spread of nuclear weapons, or the potential for even more destructive war in the Middle East. That’s why the United States negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in the first place. The reality is clear. The JCPOA is working – that is a view shared by our European allies, independent experts, and the current U.S. Secretary of Defense. The JCPOA is in America’s interest – it has significantly rolled back Iran’s nuclear program. And the JCPOA is a model for what diplomacy can accomplish – its inspections and verification regime is precisely what the United States should be working to put in place with North Korea. Indeed, at a time when we are all rooting for diplomacy with North Korea to succeed, walking away from the JCPOA risks losing a deal that accomplishes – with Iran – the very outcome that we are pursuing with the North Koreans. That is why today’s announcement is so misguided. Walking away from the JCPOA turns our back on America’s closest allies, and an agreement that our country’s leading diplomats, scientists, and intelligence professionals negotiated. In a democracy, there will always be changes in policies and priorities from one Administration to the next. But the consistent flouting of agreements that our country is a party to risks eroding America’s credibility, and puts us at odds with the world’s major powers. Debates in our country should be informed by facts, especially debates that have proven to be divisive. So it’s important to review several facts about the JCPOA. First, the JCPOA was not just an agreement between my Administration and the Iranian government. After years of building an international coalition that could impose crippling sanctions on Iran, we reached the JCPOA together with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the European Union, Russia, China, and Iran. It is a multilateral arms control deal, unanimously endorsed by a United Nations Security Council Resolution. Second, the JCPOA has worked in rolling back Iran’s nuclear program. For decades, Iran had steadily advanced its nuclear program, approaching the point where they could rapidly produce enough fissile material to build a bomb. The JCPOA put a lid on that breakout capacity. Since the JCPOA was implemented, Iran has destroyed the core of a reactor that could have produced weapons-grade plutonium; removed two-thirds of its centrifuges (over 13,000) and placed them under international monitoring; and eliminated 97 percent of its stockpile of enriched uranium – the raw materials necessary for a bomb. So by any measure, the JCPOA has imposed strict limitations on Iran’s nuclear program and achieved real results. Third, the JCPOA does not rely on trust – it is rooted in the most far-reaching inspections and verification regime ever negotiated in an arms control deal. Iran’s nuclear facilities are strictly monitored. International monitors also have access to Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain, so that we can catch them if they cheat. Without the JCPOA, this monitoring and inspections regime would go away. Fourth, Iran is complying with the JCPOA. That was not simply the view of my Administration. The United States intelligence community has continued to find that Iran is meeting its responsibilities under the deal, and has reported as much to Congress. So have our closest allies, and the international agency responsible for verifying Iranian compliance – the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Fifth, the JCPOA does not expire. The prohibition on Iran ever obtaining a nuclear weapon is permanent. Some of the most important and intrusive inspections codified by the JCPOA are permanent. Even as some of the provisions in the JCPOA do become less strict with time, this won’t happen until ten, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-five years into the deal, so there is little reason to put those restrictions at risk today. Finally, the JCPOA was never intended to solve all of our problems with Iran. We were clear-eyed that Iran engages in destabilizing behavior – including support for terrorism, and threats toward Israel and its neighbors. But that’s precisely why it was so important that we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Every aspect of Iranian behavior that is troubling is far more dangerous if their nuclear program is unconstrained. Our ability to confront Iran’s destabilizing behavior – and to sustain a unity of purpose with our allies – is strengthened with the JCPOA, and weakened without it. Because of these facts, I believe that the decision to put the JCPOA at risk without any Iranian violation of the deal is a serious mistake. Without the JCPOA, the United States could eventually be left with a losing choice between a nuclear-armed Iran or another war in the Middle East. We all know the dangers of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. It could embolden an already dangerous regime; threaten our friends with destruction; pose unacceptable dangers to America’s own security; and trigger an arms race in the world’s most dangerous region. If the constraints on Iran’s nuclear program under the JCPOA are lost, we could be hastening the day when we are faced with the choice between living with that threat, or going to war to prevent it. In a dangerous world, America must be able to rely in part on strong, principled diplomacy to secure our country. We have been safer in the years since we achieved the JCPOA, thanks in part to the work of our diplomats, many members of Congress, and our allies. Going forward, I hope that Americans continue to speak out in support of the kind of strong, principled, fact-based, and unifying leadership that can best secure our country and uphold our responsibilities around the globe. # # #"

5/8/2018 4:19:55 PM

Maybe he should have tried those arguments with congress.

So if you are keeping score, Obama policies reversed by Trump:
1) Iran Deal
2) Paris Climate Agreement
3) Trans Pacific Trade Deal
4) DACA
5) Obamacare individual mandate

5/8/2018 10:47:29 PM

1) someone asked you a question, are you planning on answering it?
2) repealing the individual mandate is hardly a massive reversal of ACA as a whole, and a fairly trite point to help you argument
3 what is your argument exactly? That all Trump cares about is reversing things the guy who made fun of him did as opposed to acting in the best interest of the country? Man you really got those libtards good!

5/8/2018 11:17:42 PM

1) What's the question, pal?
2) Completely agree that its not a massive reversal of ACA!! But that's only because congress passed ACA, and Trump couldn't get them to repeal it. Crazy how that whole congressional approval thing works. But to my point above, while it's not an immediate repeal, reversing the individual mandate takes the teeth out of Obamacare. And it's all Trump could do without a full congressional repeal.
3) The point of every post I make in this thread is to deflate the cult appeal you people have with Obama. Everything that you hate about MAGAs can be directly reflected to you.

And for the record, ifwhen Trump tries to make any treaty or pass any law without congressional approval, I hope the next President repeals them all in his first day.

5/9/2018 12:05:45 AM