Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Leroy42

2 Scoops wrote: »

The other one based in reality is that Trump doesn't care and nothing worthwhile will happen. This weird obsessed fan fiction needs a limit.

Trump doesn't care that his personal attorney signed him up to pay out 130k on a blackmail charge?

Yet he continues to have this man as his lawyer?

Whether anything happens or not to Trump is beside the point. Why didn't Trump mention this earlier when Cohen and his lawler were warning Daniels that every mention would costs $1m. Trump knew that was false, as he knew the NDA wasn't real.

You are letting you desire to see everything as simply made up get in the way of your critical thinking.

This has nothing to do with Russia, Trump properties or anything else. But just because you don't think that they have a basis does not take away from the facts in this case.

2 Scoops

Leroy42 wrote: »

Trump doesn't care that his personal attorney signed him up to pay out 130k on a blackmail charge?

Yet he continues to have this man as his lawyer?

Imo he doesn't. Cohen and Trump are borderline mob figures, that type of thing for them is like you or me brushing our teeth.

Water John

Trump was up against time on the Stomy story, as he had 60 days, from the court, in which to decide. The clock was running. Stormy, played hard ball and Trump blinked.

WinnyThePoo

Fan fiction. That's a new one. Is that the reality where Trump isn't walking a joke?. 'drain the swamp'... Now that was fiction. The wall fiction. His apparent deal making talent, where is that?.fiction as well I presume.

demfad

2 Scoops wrote: »

My view is that people are magnifying every non issue into conspiracy theories. If Rudy Giuliani is some Russian player I'll eat my hat five times over.

https://zembla.bnnvara.nl/nieuws/trump-business-partner-accused-of-involvement-in-dutch-based-money-laundering-scheme

The American real estate development company Bayrock, through which Donald Trump constructed hotels and apartment complexes, used Dutch letter box companies in a network suspected of being involved in money laundering. A ZEMBLA investigation suggests that Bayrock siphoned off $1.5 million dollars by setting up a corporate structure in the Netherlands in 2007. In New York, Bayrock also stands accused of large-scale tax fraud. This incriminating information could place Donald Trump in an extremely difficult position, claims attorney F. Oberlander, who is prosecuting Bayrock on behalf of the State of New York: “The maximum jail term would be 30 years. So you’re in really serious trouble.”

It goes on...

All Bayrock wants is to make clear to ZEMBLA that the Dutch corporate construction was established on the advice of an external legal counsel. ZEMBLA discovers that the firm in question is Bracewell & Giuliani. Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York, and part owner of the law firm at the time, is also a Trump confidante. ZEMBLA has access to correspondence between the law firm and the Dutch director of a trust company in Amsterdam, which leaves no doubt as to the ultimate beneficiary owners of the Dutch business construction: the director of Bayrock and the Khrapunov family from Kazakhstan.

There is more but this seems to indicate that Giuliani set up the money laundering structure that allowed Russians to launder money to benefit Bayrock and Donald Trump. That would make him "some kind of Russian player" I guess.

Chocolate hats don't count.

Leroy42

It is ironic that a man that ran on the headline that he was the greatest deal maker ever is increasingly forced to make autocratic calls to get anything done.

His "Mexico will pay for the Wall", turned into "they will pay at some stage" to now "get the military to pay for it and put the national guard in force".

He got nothing from Israel for agreeing to move the embassy, despite a love in with China he has failed to get any movement from them on the trade gap, and his now having to revert to, what is essentially, bully boy tactics.

Even putting aside all the other stuff floating about (Russia, Daniels, Manafort, Flynn etc etc) he is totally failing at the very things he promised he was best at. It is as if his supporters are using the Russia et al stuff as an excuse not to actually examine what he is delivering to them.

Sure the economies on the up, but nothing amazing and along the same path as it was under Obama. It is a positive that it continues for sure, but not the return to greatness he promised. Jobs continue to increase, again which is great, put like in the economy at nothing like a rate that would cause anybody to think this was due to anything special.

What has happened to the violence in places like Chicago? He said it was going to stop the day of the inauguration.

I just don't see what his supporters still see in him. And that is from someone who knows, or at least thinks I know, why so many voted for him in the first place. But the overspending continues (Tillerson spent $12m on consultants!), numerous stories of cabinet members helping themselves to 1st class flights etc. Trump continued use of Mar-a-Lago instead on spending his time in DC.

2 Scoops

So Giuliani is a Russian stooge because he may have dealt with a guy from Kazakhstan?

2 Scoops

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

His apparent deal making talent, where is that?.fiction as well I presume.

Dunno, let's see after the NoKo meeting, perceptions may or may not be different.

Leroy42

2 Scoops wrote: »

So Giuliani is a Russian stooge because he may have dealt with a guy from Kazakhstan?

No, but it hardly makes things look less likely.

But what it shows is that Giuliani had contacts in that part of the world. Now IF Putin was looking to get involved, those links, and the likes of Manafort, would be the perfect way in.

Lets face it, I don't think anybody thinks that Putin called up Trump and said he would like to help fit up the election. It would have been back-channel stuff.

Letting Stone know of the existence of the e-mails for example, for that they could coordinate when it was best to leak them.

The whole point of a conspiracy is to keep it secret, otherwise it kind of loses it purpose. It is by pulling the different strands together, strands that themselves may not have even been aware of what other stuff was going on.

I, for example, don't believe that, IF, Giuliani was involved that someone like Flynn was aware of it.

Wanderer78

Leroy42 wrote:

It is ironic that a man that ran on the headline that he was the greatest deal maker ever is increasingly forced to make autocratic calls to get anything done.

He's a fool, always was, always will be, but his fans are not for turning

Leroy42

Wanderer78 wrote: »

He's a fool, always was, always will be, but his fans are not for turning

I don't think he is a fool, I think he is very adept at knowing what drives people. What can he say that gives them the incentive to go with him. He even says it in his book, tell them whatever they need to hear to get the deal.

Tax cuts (money) MAGA (patriots) immigrants (those seeing their America change in front of them).

I think his failing is not knowing him limitations. Not allowing those around him, far more skilled in their areas, to do their jobs. He seems to think, for example, that he knows better how to handle a war than his generals. (now I say that as someone who thinks that US generals on the whole seem pretty poor, but Trump has nothing to offer).

I also don't think he is smart, not in the intelligent sense. He has trouble with details, struggles to read, struggles to articulate a coherent message. I think he gets around that with not caring what others think, and using his power (whether that be as billionaire and head of a business or now as POTUS) to bully those around him.

2 Scoops

Leroy42 wrote: »

Lets face it, I don't think anybody thinks that Putin called up Trump and said he would like to help fit up the election. It would have been back-channel stuff.

Letting Stone know of the existence of the e-mails for example, for that they could coordinate when it was best to leak them.

Stone released his flight records from the time he was apparently meant to meet Assange, he was in Miami or somewhere. The guy is a spoofer...

http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/03/exclusive-roger-stone-credit-card-flight-hotel-records/

Not saying he's innocent but part of me feels like he gets a kick out of it and is on a windup. He came right into the public light right around the time his book was coming out

demfad

2 Scoops wrote: »

So Giuliani is a Russian stooge because he may have dealt with a guy from Kazakhstan?

Sorry I wont be responding to these (all too familiar) one liners again.

Giuliani's firm set up the laundering structure for Bayrock which did not deal with just a guy from Kazakhstan but with anyone who wanted to use Trump Towers for money laundering.

From the case against Bayrock for Trump Soho:

12. Using artifices to defraud architected by Roberts & Holland and Duval & Stachenfeld in conspiracy with them1 , Arif, Satter, Scwharz arranged for up to $250,000,000 of Bayrock‟s profit as the co-developer2 of Trump SoHo to be laundered, untaxed, through a sham Delaware entity to Iceland (and reportedly then Russia), intending to evade up to $100,000,000 of U.S. taxation.

Who are Bayrock 1?

Bayrock Becomes a Mob-Owned Business. The story began when Satter, a mobster and ex-convict (assault with a deadly weapon) infiltrated Bayrock in 2002. At the time, Satter was awaiting sentencing on federal racketeering charges for running a securities fraud syndicate in collaboration with the New York Mafia and Russian mob that deprived its victims of $40,000,000. By 2003 Satter had attained majority Bayrock ownership and shared control with Arif. From then, at all relevant times, Bayrock was largely a mob-owned and operated business.

Who are Bayrock?:

Tevfik Arif is a natural person residing in New York. Arif, a native Russian, started Bayrock as a party apparatchik in Moscow in 1989 at the fall of communism, backed by oligarchs and money they stole from the Russian people.

Felix Satter (“Satter”) aka Felix Sater, is a natural person residing in New York, a native Russian who emigrated to the United States in the 1970s.

If Giuliani did not realise he was dealing with Russian mobsters helping them launder $100s of millions of dollars (who are cutouts for the Kremlin) then he is either very stupid or very dishonest. What do you think?

2 Scoops

demfad wrote: »

What do you think?

I watched a couple of documentaries on the Trump Soho dealings and Giuliani wasn't mentioned. I think if you scrutinise any mayor of a major city you'll find shady funding arrangements, that's real life. That doesn't mean he was in anyway complicit in a conspiracy to subvert the election and to draw such a conclusion is a major leap, especially since Rudy hasn't been brought up once on any accusations in US media.

demfad

2 Scoops wrote: »

I watched a couple of documentaries on the Trump Soho dealings and Giuliani wasn't mentioned.

Well that clinches it then.

I think if you scrutinise any mayor of a major city you'll find shady funding arrangements, that's real life.

First of all Giuliani was not Major of NY during his time with Bayrock. You pulled that out of your backside.

Not withstanding this please list contemporary Mayors who have knowingly been involved in setting up laundering operations to the value of $100 million. (that's just one tower, Bayrock built several) or any other comparable criminal activity?

That doesn't mean he was in anyway complicit in a conspiracy to subvert the election and to draw such a conclusion is a major leap, especially since Rudy hasn't been brought up once on any accusations in US media.

Nice goalpost shift but your assertion was that Giuliani was not a Russian 'player' or 'stooge'. Facilitating Russian criminals with Kremlin connections to launder $100 millions surely qualifies?

2 Scoops

demfad wrote: »

Well that clinches it then.



First of all Giuliani was not Major of NY during his time with Bayrock. You pulled that out of your backside.

Regardless, there's a BBC investigation and a more recent one from a few months back and Giuliani wasn't mentioned.

Not withstanding this please list contemporary Mayors who have knowingly been involved in setting up laundering operations to the value of $100 million. (that's just one tower, Bayrock built several) or any other comparable

Your assumption of guilt doesn't change the reality that the business world is built on corruption and to assume it isn't is naive

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/a-third-of-luxe-real-estate-deals-involve-suspicious-activity.html

"The Treasury Department said that 30 percent of high-end real estate deals that were subject under a new watchdog program involved people who had been targeted by the government for "suspicious activity" and potential money laundering."

Nice goalpost shift but your assertion was that Giuliani was not a Russian 'player' or 'stooge'. Facilitating Russian criminals with Kremlin connections to launder $100 millions surely qualifies?

Prove it, Giuliani's guilt hasn't been brought up once in a media climate where people like yourself are salivating to get Trump. You happily believed Putin was murdering cabinet members to cover for Trump so I'll take what you say as fact with a pinch of salt, you'll still be here next year obsessing over the same nonsense.

demfad

2 Scoops wrote: »

Regardless, there's a BBC investigation and a more recent one from a few months back and Giuliani wasn't mentioned.

You saw a program on the Telly...I guess that clinches it.

Your assumption of guilt doesn't change the reality that the business world is built on corruption and to assume it isn't is naive

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/a-third-of-luxe-real-estate-deals-involve-suspicious-activity.html

"The Treasury Department said that 30 percent of high-end real estate deals that were subject under a new watchdog program involved people who had been targeted by the government for "suspicious activity" and potential money laundering."

Yes. I would well believe it. That's how crooks like Bayrock, Donald Trump and Giuliani survive.

Prove it, Giuliani's guilt hasn't been brought up once in a media climate where people like yourself are salivating to get Trump.

Ah. You haven't seen anything about Rudi on the telly! Another clincher for you I take it?

You happily believed Putin was murdering cabinet members to cover for Trump so I'll take what you say as fact with a pinch of salt, you'll still be here next year obsessing over the same nonsense.

So you falsely claim that I believe Putin was murdering cabinet members to cover for Trump and use this false claim against me to substantiate that anything I say needs to be taken with a pinch of salt?

There are near 20 indictments in Trump Russia so far. We haven't even touched on obstruction, collusion, the data dump and barely touched on money laundering, illegal campaign funds, lying to FBI etc etc.

Most trolls have already conceded that Trump-Russia is not 'nonsense'.
Try and read a bit.

2 Scoops

demfad wrote: »

So you falsely claim that I believe Putin was murdering cabinet members to cover for Trump and use this false claim against me to substantiate that anything I say needs to be taken with a pinch of salt?

There are near 20 indictments in Trump Russia so far. We haven't even touched on obstruction, collusion, the data dump and barely touched on money laundering, illegal campaign funds, lying to FBI etc etc.

Most trolls have already conceded that Trump-Russia is not 'nonsense'.
Try and read a bit.

That's not a false claim, you've said that. Maybe you saw it on Rachel Maddow or something. The number one claim is that Trump won because he worked with the Russians to subvert the election, that's your belief and it's driving you mad. What's the most logical conclusion that nothing about collusion has been brought up, house and senate investigations are finished. Schiff has lied for 16 months. Mueller told Trumps legal team he isn't a criminal target.

All the crap surrounding it doesn't matter if the main narrative of collusion falls apart. Keep speculating like a cat in heat, I'm sure it'll be any day now.

Manic Moran

spacecoyote wrote: »

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/03/30/the-myth-of-the-criminal-immigrant?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sprout&utm_source=twitter

Interesting article around the link between immigration & crime in the US which shows that, generally speaking, an increase in immigration tends to lead toa reduction in violent crime rates.

Its not completely black & white but seems to be quite a comprehensive study & flies in the face of much of the agenda that Trump & his cronies have been pushing.

There are a couple of issues with that report.

Firstly, folks don’t have much of an issue with immigration. They have an issue with illegal immigration, which is another matter entirely. Even the summary of the report explicitly states that it doesn’t really account for illegal immigrants, because they don’t like to announce themselves. Yet the report seems to conflate one position with the figures of another.

Secondly, under-reporting of crimes is the precise reason that sanctuary policies started. Local law enforcement are faced with an underground crime environment: The same hard-working illegal immigrants who some folks welcome with open arms are the exact same people targeted by the criminal illegal immigrant population that others want to clamp down on, for two reasons. Firstly, that that’s likely who is around them, and secondly, illegal immigrants were hardly likely to show up to a police station and report the crime. “OK, and you are..... oh... illegal. Step into this cell please...” A guarantee that reporting won’t mean deporting allows local law enforcement to investigate crimes, or even discover them in the first place. This means that the assessment seems to be missing a very substantial amount of the crimes being committed by the people it’s attempting to focus on.

Thirdly, and it is a more minor point, even if the crime rate from immigrants is about the same as that of the population as a whole, why are we asking for that small addition? It may be overdone as a famous example, but the killing of Kate Steinle was a direct result of a deliberate lack of immigration enforcement. So whilst Mayor Schaaf is doubtless correct that her warning has allowed a number of honest illegal immigrants to avoid getting caught up in an ICE raid, she is similarly ignoring that a number of people on ICE’s target list have been identified since as suspects in crimes committed afterwards. Thus the discussion also has to be framed in the context of the risk of retaining criminals in the country as the cost of lettin people stay who should never have been here in the first place, whatever the relative numbers are.

mcmoustache

2 Scoops wrote: »

That's not a false claim, you've said that. Maybe you saw it on Rachel Maddow or something. The number one claim is that Trump won because he worked with the Russians to subvert the election, that's your belief and it's driving you mad. What's the most logical conclusion that nothing about collusion has been brought up, house and senate investigations are finished. Schiff has lied for 16 months. Mueller told Trumps legal team he isn't a criminal target.

There's a fair amount of nonsense here to unpack but I'll do my best.

The house investigation was a sham. Nunes saw to that. The Senate investigations are still ongoing - they most definitely aren't finished. I'm not sure what you're suggesting about Schiff. Not being a target doesn't mean what you're implying.

demfad

2 Scoops wrote: »

That's not a false claim, you've said that. Maybe you saw it on Rachel Maddow or something.

Please quote where I have said that. Otherwise we can assume that you are lying.

What's the most logical conclusion that nothing about collusion has been brought up,

This is demonstrably false. Either you have been watching Fox news only for the last 2 years or you are lying.

house and senate investigations are finished.

The Senate investigation is not finish, this is another 'mistruth' on your part.
The Reps and Dems in House committee have not cooperated in many months. The Dems are still investigating. Nunes and some of his side have released their conclusion. Some Reps on the actual committee have distanced themselves from it notably Gowdy. Infact the committee did not interview most of the people or follow most of the lines of inquiry brought up in the main FBI investigation.

Schiff has lied for 16 months.

Or perhaps, you don't know what you are talking about?

Mueller told Trumps legal team he isn't a criminal target.

So in the SC's investigation you have witnesses (who will not be effected) people of interest, subjects and targets who could all be indicted.
For a sitting president to be the subject of an investigation of this nature is very serious indeed. Targets of investigations have sufficient evidence to prosecute and are in process of being indicted. Subjects are not (yet).
So if Trump enters a grand jury testimony as a subject if he lies or even tells the truth he may well leave as the target.

All the crap surrounding it doesn't matter if the main narrative of collusion falls apart. Keep speculating like a cat in heat, I'm sure it'll be any day now.

You have just stated that Trump is the subject of a criminal investigation: your own words!

2 Scoops

demfad wrote: »

Please quote where I have said that. Otherwise we can assume that you are lying.

Quick search, you've been spouting the same drivel for over a year now. These aren't even bad compared to others like where you call the tea party movement a Russian front...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102862759&postcount=466

There are dead bodies: Second at Rosneft murdered in his car fitting description of high level Rosneft contact. One of 4 spies arrested in Moscow for being US agents is missing presumed dead. Trump attorney Michael Cohens brother'd father in Law shot to death in Florida, lived at a TRump tower there. He organised the 'Ukraine peace deal' meet between Cohen, Satter and the Ukrainian politician (now being tried for treason there). He was killed for that.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102863350&postcount=468

These investigations are happening for a REASON. These MURDERS are happening for a reason.

2 Scoops

Damn I missed the first line in the murder conspiracy link lmao. You've been straight up lying your ass off for a year now, you're almost as bad as Schiff. Most of your posts contain fallacies and you call me a liar. I'm done mods, he wanted me to link them.

Intelligence agencies have corroborated the parts of the Steele dossier confirming intercepted Russian Intelligence/Government conversations discussing the collaboration and conspiracy with Trump. Not random conversations but a consistent pattern as per dossier.

Itssoeasy

2 Scoops wrote: »

That's not a false claim, you've said that. Maybe you saw it on Rachel Maddow or something. The number one claim is that Trump won because he worked with the Russians to subvert the election, that's your belief and it's driving you mad. What's the most logical conclusion that nothing about collusion has been brought up, house and senate investigations are finished. Schiff has lied for 16 months. Mueller told Trumps legal team he isn't a criminal target.

All the crap surrounding it doesn't matter if the main narrative of collusion falls apart. Keep speculating like a cat in heat, I'm sure it'll be any day now.

The House "investigation" was a partisan disgrace and the Senate investigation hasn't finished it's investigation. Adam Schiff lied ? Okay so devin Nunes was telling the truth then ? No, they told him he was a subject and not a target of of now. Jesus any more falsehoods ?

Itssoeasy

2 Scoops wrote: »

Damn I missed the first line in the murder conspiracy link lmao. You've been straight up lying your ass off for a year now, you're almost as bad as Schiff. Most of your posts contain fallacies and you call me a liar. I'm done mods, he wanted me to link them.

Except the Republican Chairman of the Senate intelligence committee backed him up. That Chairman is Richard Burr.

Water John

I think DT should take heed of what has happened to the former President of South Korea. He'll be in his mid 90s if he gets similar.
https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0406/952529-south-korea-trial/

2 Scoops

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The House "investigation" was a partisan disgrace and the Senate investigation hasn't finished it's investigation. Adam Schiff lied ? Okay so devin Nunes was telling the truth then ? No, they told him he was a subject and not a target of of now. Jesus any more falsehoods ?

Schiff has been on media outlets something like 250 times since the inaugeration peddling the same narrative. What he does is he says he has evidence and then walk it back weeks later when pressed. I don't think any of them including Nunez are truth tellers, but at least he hasn't whored himself out to the media like Schiff has.

mcmoustache

2 Scoops wrote: »

Schiff has been on media outlets something like 250 times since the inaugeration peddling the same narrative. What he does is he says he has evidence and then walk it back weeks later when pressed. I don't think any of them including Nunez are truth tellers, but at least he hasn't whored himself out to the media like Schiff has.

Could you quote a lie for us. It shouldn't be too hard if he has been doing it so often.

Leroy42

2 Scoops wrote: »

Schiff has been on media outlets something like 250 times since the inaugeration peddling the same narrative. What he does is he says he has evidence and then walk it back weeks later when pressed. I don't think any of them including Nunez are truth tellers, but at least he hasn't whored himself out to the media like Schiff has.

If that is indeed true, not sure why you would have a problem with it. Surely you can appreciate that he is just playing the game that Trump started

demfad

2 Scoops wrote: »

Quick search, you've been spouting the same drivel for over a year now. These aren't even bad compared to others like where you call the tea party movement a Russian front...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102862759&postcount=466




https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102863350&postcount=468

Yes. There were high profile people connected with Trump-Russia who were murdered violently. Former FBI investigator and Intelligence specialist Clinton Watts answered 'follow the dead bodies' when asked about how to investigate Russia's involvement. Russia does have a habit of murdering people who it deems a danger to their interests.

Interesting you quoted a conversation with that poster: he was totally discredited here for insisting there was not a shred of evidence of collusion between the Trump admin and Russia even as he got bogged down under a mountain of it.