Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Peregrinus

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I would guess all the evidence is there. Mueller would be wise to make sure it has been shared and even leaked if things go pear shaped for him. I have said before it is truly bizarre that an individual being investigated can contol or stop any such investigations. The Americans really need to look at the power vested in POTUS, especially when he turns out to be bad and dangerous.

Trump asserts that he has the power to dismiss (or bring about the dismissal of) Mueller, but most commentators say no, he hasn't. One of the reasons, probably, why Trump hasn't yet tried to dismiss him is that he has been persuaded that the courts will strike down his attempts, or at least that his attempts will be mired in the courts for months and will do him more damage than good.

It's also quite likely that if Trump did succeed in firing Mueller, the House of Representatives would appoint their own special counsel to make the same investigation - if not immediately, then after the mid-term elections. And Trump, of course, can't fire a congressional appointee.

Trent Houseboat

Peregrinus wrote:

It's also quite likely that if Trump did succeed in firing Mueller, the House of Representatives would appoint their own special counsel to make the same investigation - if not immediately, then after the mid-term elections. And Trump, of course, can't fire a congressional appointee.

And the gormless consumers of Hannity/Sinclair/Alex Jones who already think that Mueller is a Democrat stooge and everything he does is in pursuit of a Clintonist witch hunt are likely to believe in the impartiality of a an investigation appointed by Democrats?

If Democrats took the house and such an investigation turned up video evidence of Trump taking part in (randomly generated crime) pizza restaurant child sex murder cult, they'd simply dismiss it as false flag, crisis actors in league with Hollywood librul elites and da Derp State.

No need to fire anyone when you control the media(or controllers of that media sees you as a useful idiot) of the echo chamber you demographic inhabits.

Zubeneschamali

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

No need to fire anyone when you control the media

Yes, I have seen several commentators say that the worst case scenario is not that Mueller is fired, it is that Mueller delivers a damning report and nobody does anything about it. The Republicans in Congress yell "Fake News!" and bin the report.

Then what do you do?

everlast75

Peregrinus wrote: »

Trump asserts that he has the power to dismiss (or bring about the dismissal of) Mueller, but most commentators say no, he hasn't. One of the reasons, probably, why Trump hasn't yet tried to dismiss him is that he has been persuaded that the courts will strike down his attempts, or at least that his attempts will be mired in the courts for months and will do him more damage than good.

At the moment, yes. But as Court ruling after Court ruling goes against him, he will become more and more inclined to risk it all.. ie fire Mueller. I believe this as he has laid out the groundwork for months

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's also quite likely that if Trump did succeed in firing Mueller, the House of Representatives would appoint their own special counsel to make the same investigation - if not immediately, then after the mid-term elections. And Trump, of course, can't fire a congressional appointee.

The republican party have to be compromosed, given their reluctance to protect Mueller now. I don't believe they will do it later either

everlast75

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, I have seen several commentators say that the worst case scenario is not that Mueller is fired, it is that Mueller delivers a damning report and nobody does anything about it. The Republicans in Congress yell "Fake News!" and bin the report.

Then what do you do?

You wait for the dems to take the majority and then revisit. Unless stormy gets to Trump first of course

Mumha

jooksavage wrote: »

I just heard the latest one - Tim O'Brien (yes that Tim O'Brien) was downplaying the importance of the Cohen raid, basically saying MC wasnt really involved in the day-to-day stuff in the Trump orgsnisation and that Trump himself might not be that exposed.

He did point out a few areas though where he thinks Trump is in real danger. One of those is NY DA Eric Schneidermans often forgotten investigation into Manafort. Even if Trump pardons Manafort on the federal charges, theres SFA he can do to help him out on state charges. And although President Trump cant be charged by state prosecutors, those charges could be waiting for him when he completes his term.

Also he's certain Trump will try to fire Mueller but says its too late as Meuller has been sharing information through cooperation agreements with state prosecutors offices so the investigation is never going away, even if Meuller is.

Rachel Maddow had two worrying takes on Mueller->Rosenstein and SDNY.

Those corruptible bozos, Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy have written Rosenstein demanding to see the un-redacted Comey memos, which is currently evidence in an on-going investigation. Rosenstein has asked for more time to decide whether he will release it or not....he has an extra few days. The fear is that Rosenstein, correctly, won't release it, giving Nunes/Gowdy/Trump/Fox an excuse to spin it that Rosenstein is hiding "the truth" and use that to fire him. That would then open the door to get at Mueller. It's even more worrying that McConnell has refused to allow the protection of Mueller to proceed.

The other issue is that we know Geoffrey Berman recused himself from the SDNY's investigation of Michael Cohen, but he is only a temporary DA, which is up in early May. Trump could choose not to put his name forward for Senate approval, and appoint someone more amenable.

alpahaeagle

Have you ever thought that muller is going on such a a wide arc of investgating that there is nothing to find?

Mumha

everlast75 wrote: »

You wait for the dems to take the majority and then revisit. Unless stormy gets to Trump first of course

There is a clear fear that what happened in 2016, happens in November, in terms of Russian interference, and the Republicans are doing nothing to make sure this doesn't happen again.

Mumha

alpahaeagle wrote: »

Have you ever thought that muller is going on such a a wide arc of investgating that there is nothing to find?

He's already had 19 indictments and 5 guilty pleas, where have you been ?

everlast75

Btw - out of the 20 or so companies that pay to use Trump's name on products, all but 2 have ditched him. That's the effect him becoming president has had commercially

VinLieger

alpahaeagle wrote: »

Have you ever thought that muller is going on such a a wide arc of investgating that there is nothing to find?

LOL, so your head is firmly stuck in the sand?

notobtuse

According to a Marist Poll this week, Americans have an increasingly unfavorable view of Robert Mueller. The unfavorable opinion of the special counsel is at 30% of Americans, up from 20% in late March (and 38% of residents say they have either never heard of Mueller or are unsure how to rate him, which is shocking to me since the media have dedicated so much time to covering Mueller’s investigation, in between character assassinations of Trump, IMO).  Mueller’s primary focus of the investigation was supposed to be Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.  IMO, it has become evident to many that his focus is anything but Russian interference and has taken to running a witch hunt.  

I say give Mueller a deadline of a couple months to come up with his conclusions as to his original mandate, which was Russian interference, or shut the special council down.

alpahaeagle

alpahaeagle wrote: »

Have you ever thought that muller is going on such a a wide arc of investgating that there is nothing to find?

It looks to me like he's finding dirt everywhere. Trump has surrounded himself with a lot of shady characters.

Hurrache

notobtuse wrote: »

According to a Marist Poll this week, Americans have an increasingly unfavorable view of Robert Mueller. The unfavorable opinion of the special counsel is at 30% of Americans,

So what you're saying is Mueller is seen more favourably than Trump, or in your terms, American people have a bigger unfavourable view of Trump than Mueller.

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

According to a Marist Poll this week, Americans have an increasingly unfavorable view of Robert Mueller. The unfavorable opinion of the special counsel is at 30% of Americans, up from 20% in late March (and 38% of residents say they have either never heard of Mueller or are unsure how to rate him, which is shocking to me since the media have dedicated so much time to covering Mueller’s investigation, in between character assassinations of Trump, IMO).  Mueller’s primary focus of the investigation was supposed to be Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.  IMO, it has become evident to many that his focus is anything but Russian interference and has taken to running a witch hunt.  

I say give Mueller a deadline of a couple months to come up with his conclusions as to his original mandate, which was Russian interference, or shut the special council down.

Do you know what the wording on the set-up of the investigation actually is? Please show me and then explain to me how it is, or was, ever simply about Russian interference.

To help you out here is the letter; https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3726408-Rosenstein-letter-appointing-Mueller-special.html

CFR 600.4 states:

(a)Original jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.4

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, I have seen several commentators say that the worst case scenario is not that Mueller is fired, it is that Mueller delivers a damning report and nobody does anything about it. The Republicans in Congress yell "Fake News!" and bin the report.

Then what do you do?

Not that I'd be defending the GOP, but not all GOP politicians are completely unprincipled. If the report is damning and has supporting evidence, then there are some GOP politicians who will do the right thing.

notobtuse

Hurrache wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

According to a Marist Poll this week, Americans have an increasingly unfavorable view of Robert Mueller. The unfavorable opinion of the special counsel is at 30% of Americans,

So what you're saying is Mueller is seen more favourably than Trump, or in your terms, American people have a bigger unfavourable view of Trump than Mueller.

Apples and oranges when you figure in that 38% of people don't know who Mueller is or have no opinion.

notobtuse

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, I have seen several commentators say that the worst case scenario is not that Mueller is fired, it is that Mueller delivers a damning report and nobody does anything about it. The Republicans in Congress yell "Fake News!" and bin the report.

Then what do you do?

Not that I'd be defending the GOP, but not all GOP politicians are completely unprincipled. If the report is damning and has supporting evidence, then there are some GOP politicians who will do the right thing.

Yup... "investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."

That's what we were all led to believe.  It's the 'small print' that turned it into a witch hunt, IMO.

Quin_Dub

notobtuse wrote: »

Apples and oranges when you figure in that 38% of people don't know who Mueller is or have no opinion.

Not really - Every Poll has a reasonably sizable "Don't Know/No Opinion" bucket.

Of that "Don't Know" bucket I cannot imagine that many of them fall into the "I don't know who he is" category..

The majority I'd submit, either have no opinion or are undecided.

VinLieger

notobtuse wrote: »

 IMO, it has become evident to many that his focus is anything but Russian interference and has taken to running a witch hunt .  

Aww and you were doing so well until you called it a witch hunt making it pretty obvious where you get your diet of bias info from

notobtuse

VinLieger wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

 IMO, it has become evident to many that his focus is anything but Russian interference and has taken to running a witch hunt .  

Aww and you were doing so well until you called it a witch hunt making it pretty obvious where you get your diet of bias info from

Please tell me how many of the indictments Mueller has handed out so far involve the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

Yup... "investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."

That's what we were all led to believe.  It's the 'small print' that turned it into a witch hunt, IMO.

So its a witch hunt because people were not paying attention?

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

Please tell me how many of the indictments Mueller has handed out so far involve the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

13. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/robert-mueller-russians-charged-election

That is without looking into Manafort, Flynn etc which one could dig deeper into (as I think Mueller is).

There is simply no doubt that Russia interfered. We also have the Trump Jr meeting, which even Trump Jr acknowledges was trying to get info through Russia to help with the campaign.

Professor Moriarty

notobtuse wrote: »

Yup... "investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election."

That's what we were all led to believe. It's the 'small print' that turned it into a witch hunt, IMO.

But even if it has turned to other matters, so what? Obviously, given The Donald's insouciance and lack of opinion on the matter, there is nothing to hide. It's not like he's bothered about the investigation or what it might uncover. Otherwise he'd be tweeting about it. So, it's all good, isn't it?

jooksavage

Witch hunt. Jesus Christ. Indictments and guilty pleas to beat the band and people are still whining about bloody witch hunts. You know that no one would be using that term if witches HAD ACTUALLY BEEN FOUND, right?

Water John

Mueller is not up for election. His public ratings matter, diddly squat. He has a job of work to do. It simply about right and wrong.
Every politician and public servant, in America, should sign up to giving him, any help they can.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

But even if it has turned to other matters, so what? Obviously, given The Donald's insouciance and lack of opinion on the matter, there is nothing to hide. It's not like he's bothered about the investigation or what it might uncover. Otherwise he'd be tweeting about it. So, it's all good, isn't it?

Ooops. My bad. This tweet three hours ago:

Slippery James Comey, the worst FBI Director in history, was not fired because of the phony Russia investigation where, by the way, there was NO COLLUSION (except by the Dems)!

Leroy42

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Ooops. My bad. This tweet three hours ago:

Slippery James Comey, the worst FBI Director in history, was not fired because of the phony Russia investigation where, by the way, there was NO COLLUSION (except by the Dems)!

Haha, even though he said it on TV that it defo was. The man is a joke. So we have total confirmation that the man is a liar, why would anybody believe anything he has to say?

everlast75

Water John wrote: »

Mueller is not up for election. His public ratings matter, diddly squat. He has a job of work to do. It simply about right and wrong.
Every politician and public servant, in America, should sign up to giving him, any help they can.

And furthermore, Mueller doesn't give a flying **** what DJT thinks of him or the investigation. Unfortunately for Trump, Mueller keeps plugging away, head down, building his case.

There is more than circumstantial evidence that Trump obstructed justice, but if you want to nail the SCROTUS, you need to have it all locked down. That takes time.

So on the grounds that there is more than circumstantial evidence, coupled with the amount of convictions to date, the idea of shutting it down to all but DJT's base, makes absolutely no sense.

notobtuse

Leroy42 wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

Please tell me how many of the indictments Mueller has handed out so far involve the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

13.  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/16/robert-mueller-russians-charged-election

That is without looking into Manafort, Flynn etc which one could dig deeper into (as I think Mueller is).

There is simply no doubt that Russia interfered.  We also have the Trump Jr meeting, which even Trump Jr acknowledges was trying to get info through Russia to help with the campaign.

I was referring to the people involved with the Trump campaign.  There is no doubt Russian tried influencing the election... But not like people think.  IMO, it was not to elect Trump, but rather to weaken the likely winner... Clinton, going into office, whom Putin despised.  Russia, like everyone else, believed Hillary would win the election.  And I believe that 13 Russians deal by Mueller was only symbolic.  How many think any of them will ever be prosecuted?  Does Mueller even think any of them will ever be prosecuted?