Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Water John

But that is the most important issue, that Russia sought to interfere in the US election. You're agreeing with me. Mueller job is to investigate, any collusion, in that. Job needs to be done, for the sake of American democracy.
Trump is secondary. He just happens to have his past links, linking into more present links, with Russia, catching up with him.

VinLieger

notobtuse wrote: »

I was referring to the people involved with the Trump campaign.

You literally were not

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.

No mention of the trump campaign so stop trying to move the goalposts when your proven wrong

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

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?

Fine, by we already know that Trump Jr tried to obtain information through the Russian government. From this you then must accept that the man that everyone knows runs everything himself completely lost control of his own campaign.

We know that days after that meeting Trump suddenly started talking about HC missing 33k e-mails. It could be mere coincidence I guess, but

We know that Roger Stone was in contact with Wikileaks and Guccifer.

We know that Flynn, was in illegal contact with Russia immediately after the election. It has yet to be seen whether he simply turned into a Russiafile upon Trumps election.

We know that Sessions had meetings with Russians, and lied under oath to congress about those meetings.

We know Trump lied to try to cover up Trump Jr meeting with the Russians.

Is that a slam dunk or prove that Trump was directly involved. No. Does it raise some serious questions that must be answered? Yes. People calling it a witch hunt despite all of the above (and their is much, much more) are doing democracy a disservice.

notobtuse

Leroy42 wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

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?

Fine, by we already know that Trump Jr tried to obtain information through the Russian government.  From this you then must accept that the man that everyone knows runs everything himself completely lost control of his own campaign.

We know that days after that meeting Trump suddenly started talking about HC missing 33k e-mails.  It could be mere coincidence I guess, but

We know that Roger Stone was in contact with Wikileaks and Guccifer.

We know that Flynn, was in illegal contact with Russia immediately after the election.  It has yet to be seen whether he simply turned into a Russiafile upon Trumps election.

We know that Sessions had meetings with Russians, and lied under oath to congress about those meetings.

We know Trump lied to try to cover up Trump Jr meeting with the Russians.

Is that a slam dunk or prove that Trump was directly involved.  No.  Does it raise some serious questions that must be answered?  Yes.  People calling it a witch hunt despite all of the above (and their is much, much more) are doing democracy a disservice.

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.  Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

everlast75

Trolling - level 10 unlocked (from the New Yorker magazine)


WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Calling it a “regrettable accident,” Amazon apologized on Thursday for shipping ten thousand advance copies of James Comey’s book, “A Higher Loyalty,” to the White House.

Cartons of the book arrived early Thursday morning and kept coming throughout the day, until stacks of the book clogged virtually every hallway and office in the building.

Reportedly, Donald J. Trump was so incensed by the book situation that he screamed at Mike Pence while the Vice-President was in the middle of praising him, one source said.

The White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, called any speculation that Trump had ordered Comey’s book “absurd,” adding, “The President does not order reading material.”

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.  Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

What did Trump Jr have the meeting for? He says it was to source information that the Russian government had obtained illegally by hacking into the DNC servers.

HC paid for a private company to try to get information about Donald. Nothing illegal about that, as you say everyone does it.

Treason, sedition? I simply cannot see how you can absolve Trump Jr is the very thing that you accuse HC of doing. At least have some consistency. Every country is bigger than the politicians. Trump (like HC) will eventually be gone, but the gymnastics that people are doing to try to avoid having to confront the truth is going to harm the US much longer.

That is the bigger picture here

Zubeneschamali

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.

Apart from breaking the law, I agree. Oh, and then talking about it, and releasing documents proving it. Other than that, quite right. Well, maybe dragging his Dad into it to draft a lying statement about it thereby obstructing justice and breaking the law himself, maybe that was wrong, too.

everlast75

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.  Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

I don't know where to even begin with this kind of "logic"...

1) It is okay to research the opposition. It is NOT okay for a foreign power to attempt to influence an election
2) It was not a Russian dossier
3) it was not illegal
4) Hence no indictment.

Professor Moriarty

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition. Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting. Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

I'm sure he'll get to the bottom of things. Your 'But Hillary' nonsense is getting tiresome.

circadian

everlast75 wrote: »

Trolling - level 10 unlocked (from the New Yorker magazine)


WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Calling it a “regrettable accident,” Amazon apologized on Thursday for shipping ten thousand advance copies of James Comey’s book, “A Higher Loyalty,” to the White House.

Cartons of the book arrived early Thursday morning and kept coming throughout the day, until stacks of the book clogged virtually every hallway and office in the building.

Reportedly, Donald J. Trump was so incensed by the book situation that he screamed at Mike Pence while the Vice-President was in the middle of praising him, one source said.

The White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, called any speculation that Trump had ordered Comey’s book “absurd,” adding, “The President does not order reading material.”

Is this another way of saying The President does not read?

Who ordered the books? Did Bezos do it out of his own pocket since Trump has been ranting about Amazon recently?

notobtuse

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.  Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

I'm sure he'll get to the bottom of things. Your 'But Hillary' nonsense is getting tiresome.

This thread is for the continuing discussion of Donald Trumps's presidency in the US and any related matters.

When it comes to Donald Trump’s presidency, especially things associated with the 2016 election, I’d say discussion of Hillary Clinton’s actions during the campaign are VERY 'related matters.'

Zubeneschamali

circadian wrote: »

Is this another way of saying The President does not read?

It's a joke from the New Yorker, not a news item.

circadian

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's a joke from the New Yorker, not a news item.

Egg on my face. Either I'm gullible or this administration is so warped that it's actually believable.

amandstu

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's a joke from the New Yorker, not a news item.

Just the kind of dead pan you would expect from our Sarah, though.

DrumSteve

notobtuse wrote: »

When it comes to Donald Trump’s presidency, especially things associated with the 2016 election, I’d say discussion of Hillary Clinton’s actions during the campaign are VERY 'related matters.'

Fair play to you for sticking with it for this long.

I genuinely don't understand why people swear such blind loyalty to Trump even after all the crap he's come out with but, yeah, fair play.

You do need to eventually let Hillary go though. Just because she is shady, don't mean Donald is absolved of anything.

The whataboutery eventually just ruins any possibly decent points you might make.

Water John

Yeah and the Steele dossier was all well and good when it was being funded by GOP sources.

Mumha

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.

You do understand that Mueller is investigating this as he would a mob family i.e. from the outside in ? That said he has already indicted Trump's National Security Advisor, his Campaign Chairman, his Deputy Campaign Chairman, and one of his Foreign Policy advisors

In this capacity, Mueller oversees the investigation into "any links and/or coordination between Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump, and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

Better this be done right and fully, otherwise Trump will be seen as illegitimate, and it will cause a constitutional crisis.

One other thing to remember, Ken Starr was the Special Counsel investigating blowjobs from August 5, 1994 – September 11, 1998, that's four years. Mueller hasn't even warmed up yet.

BabyCheeses

notobtuse wrote: »

When it comes to Donald Trump’s presidency, especially things associated with the 2016 election, I’d say discussion of Hillary Clinton’s actions during the campaign are VERY 'related matters.'

If only the dems weren't in charge. If the republicans could only get in control so they could appoint a republican to investigate Clinton.

Mumha

notobtuse wrote: »

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?

You must remember that if any one of them enter a western country again, they will be arrested, and liable for extradition.

notobtuse

Water John wrote: »

Yeah and the Steele dossier was all well and good when it was being funded by GOP sources.

I’d say that comment is a bit misleading.

It was a media outlet The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, that originally hired Fusion GPS to unearth damaging information about several Republican presidential candidates, including Mr. Trump. But The Free Beacon told the firm to stop doing research in May 2016.   It was not until after the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC started paying Fusion GPS’s bills that they brought in Steele and the Russian oberatives to produce what became a specious dossier that was used by government agencies during Obama's reign to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later to cripple his presidency.  IMO.

notobtuse

Mumha 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, 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.

You do understand that Mueller is investigating this as he would a mob family i.e. from the outside in ? That said he has already indicted Trump's National Security Advisor, his Campaign Chairman, his Deputy Campaign Chairman, and one of his Foreign Policy advisors

In this capacity, Mueller oversees the investigation into "any links and/or coordination between Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump, and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

Better this be done right and fully, otherwise Trump will be seen as illegitimate, and it will cause a constitutional crisis.

One other thing to remember, Ken Starr was the Special Counsel investigating blowjobs from August 5, 1994 – September 11, 1998, that's four years. Mueller hasn't even warmed up yet.

Okay... Would you agree then that Mueller should also open the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State involving the sale of so much control of US Uranium to the Russians; the destruction of her blackberry and personal server after a subpoena was issued; the pay to play accusations of the Clinton Foundation - in particular with donations and payments made by Russians; Hillary, her staff, the DNC and President Obama’s roll in the false Steele dossier which was used as the basis to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later to cripple his presidency, and a few other Democratic operatives like the UN Ambassador, heads of the CIA, DOJ and FBI and their rolls in suspect actions during the election and ongoing investigations?

mcmoustache

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.  Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

Wow. You've gone full MAGA haven't you.

Mumha

notobtuse wrote: »

I’d say that comment is a bit misleading.

It was a media outlet The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, that originally hired Fusion GPS to unearth damaging information about several Republican presidential candidates, including Mr. Trump. But The Free Beacon told the firm to stop doing research in May 2016.   It was not until after the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC started paying Fusion GPS’s bills that they brought in Steele and the Russian oberatives to produce what became a specious dossier that was used by government agencies during Obama's reign to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later to cripple his presidency.  IMO.

However, Steele was not informed who was paying Fusion GPS. The FBI investigation was already underway when Steele first contacted them. In fact, it was because they couldn't/didn't tell him of their ongoing investigation that he thought they weren't taking him seriously enough, that he went to the media.

mcmoustache

Mumha wrote: »

You do understand that Mueller is investigating this as he would a mob family i.e. from the outside in ? That said he has already indicted Trump's National Security Advisor, his Campaign Chairman, his Deputy Campaign Chairman, and one of his Foreign Policy advisors

All coffee boys I'm sure.

Water John

You just lobbed some nice little untruth in there, Noto. Who has concluded the Steele dossier, is false???

aloyisious

notobtuse wrote: »

Campaigns always are looking for dirt on their opposition.  Don Jr did nothing wrong taking that short meeting.  Now if you want to talk about REAL Russian collusion, lets look at Hillary Clinton paying for a false Russian propaganda dossier used to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later cripple his presidency, IMO. That may not fall under the term of treason, but it sure sounds like sedition to me. Where’s Mueller’s indictment of Clinton?

When did the spying you mention take place? The Trump Administration didn't exist until after the election was won by him and he was sworn into office in Jan 2017.

As for trying to derail his election, isn't that what Don Jnr was aiming to do to HRC's election with the info he hoped to get from the Russians? Using your definition of sedition, was Don Jnr then involved in sedition as well as HRC?

Re crippling Don's presidency, the Dems have zilch power to do that. He's been doing it himself by hiring and then firing the top people he head-hunted and appointed to be in his cabinet, along with some public servants he took over from the Obama Admin and reappointed in their jobs.

mcmoustache

notobtuse wrote: »

Okay... Would you agree then that Mueller should also open the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State involving the sale of so much control of US Uranium to the Russians; the destruction of her blackberry and personal server after a subpoena was issued; the pay to play accusations of the Clinton Foundation - in particular with donations and payments made by Russians; Hillary, her staff, the DNC and President Obama’s roll in the false Steele dossier which was used as the basis to illegally spy on the Trump administration in a scheme to derail Trump’s bid for the White House and later to cripple his presidency, and a few other Democratic operatives like the UN Ambassador, heads of the CIA, DOJ and FBI and their rolls in suspect actions during the election and ongoing investigations?

Trump's DOJ is free to appoint as many special counsels as they like. It's not Hillary's DOJ, it's Trump's, run by Sessions and Rosenstein. Mueller isn't the only person who can be a special counsel. Where the hell are you getting your info?

Water John

I think Notobuse just lobbed all the pointers on his scorecard, onto the one post.

notobtuse

DrumSteve wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

When it comes to Donald Trump’s presidency, especially things associated with the 2016 election, I’d say discussion of Hillary Clinton’s actions during the campaign are VERY 'related matters.'

Fair play to you for sticking with it for this long.

I genuinely don't understand why people swear such blind loyalty to Trump even after all the crap he's come out with but, yeah, fair play.

You do need to eventually let Hillary go though. Just because she is shady, don't mean Donald is absolved of anything.

The whataboutery eventually just ruins any possibly decent points you might make.

I don’t swear blind loyalty to Trump.  There are numbers of things I don’t like that he has done.  But I’ve been reading this thread for some time and felt opposing debate against the majority mob view needed to be presented.  That is what I am doing.  I have never claimed to be fair or neutral.... I am merely debating on the Trump/GOP side of things.  Yes, I must admit that I do support much of it. And I try to do it in an informative and more non-abusive manner than most. 

Is that so wrong?

And going off the comments in response to my posts, I don’t think anything I say would ever be considered ‘decent points.’

mcmoustache

notobtuse wrote: »

Is that so wrong?

Supporting Trump is fine but you are providing a lot "facts" that have been shown to be false. That's not fine and you can expect to be corrected.