Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

notobtuse

Midlife wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

The salacious and unverified anti-Trump dossier was paid for by Hillary Clinton and used to get a FISA warrant to spy on Trump. And remember, it has been reported that much of the information in the report came from Russian operatives.  Russians paid Bill Clitnon $500,000 for a speech and funneled millions into the Clinton Foundation before the election.  Then there’s the Uranium One deal when Hillary was SOS and working behind the scenes to run for POTUS.

Not so beyond stupid, IMO, but rather... legitimate concerns that should be investigated

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/02/13/the-media-is-ignoring-ties-between-the-clinton-campaign-and-russians/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8a544310146a

If there's any actual evidence, they should.

Unfortunately, your links lead to standard nonsense peddled by highly partisan voices.

I found out from one that Steele, had someone contact someone else. The first someone knows a Russian. Isn't that interesting, ho hum.

It's just more of the suspicious questions you need to float in order to pretend that there's something else going on apart from the blindingly obvious. Same as with the birther nonsense which I'm assuming you believe. Your only evidence is starts with 'why didn't...'

Unfortunately that's not evidence, just speculation. Things like digital footprints and e-mail chains saying 'I love it' to Russian conspirators offering dirt on the opponent.

That's evidence.  

You can't produce anything. And even if they are all as corrupt as the other,  then shouldn't the democrats be in power on the basis of being less stupid?

You are incorrect about me and the birther issue.  I believed Obama was born in the US.  But Obama played it up good...  He could have released his birth certificate much earlier but didn't to gain political favor, IMO.

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

I keep hearing Trumo ‘lost’ the popular vote.  This is incorrect, IMO, as Trump and Clinton did not campaign after the popular vote because it is not the method used to get one elected.  If the presidency was determined by popular vote who knows what would have happened as the candidates would have campaigned differently.  Trump merely did not get as many total votes as Clinton… and it means absolutely nothing, IMO.

This has got to win post of the day, week, month, year.

Trump didn't lose the popular vote, he just didn't get as many votes as HC.

That, sir, is a special kind of thinking you've got going on!

Midlife

notobtuse wrote: »

You are incorrect about me and the birther issue.  I believed Obama was born in the US.  But Obama played it up good...  He could have released his birth certificate much earlier but didn't to gain political favor, IMO.

OK, apologies for the assumption.

So what do you make about Trump's motives for following it for so long?

is he just a pathelogical liar who didn't like Obama, a man who believes in tin-foil hat theories, or a racist?

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

You are incorrect about me and the birther issue.  I believed Obama was born in the US.  But Obama played it up good...  He could have released his birth certificate much earlier but didn't to gain political favor, IMO.

What political favor? Is this the deep seated love of foreigners we hear so much about? You think he got more votes because people believed he wasn't actually born in the USA?

So, if as you say you believed that Obama was born in the USA, do you accept that Trump carried out a failed attempt to undermine the legitimate POTUS by lying and making up false allegations?

Overheal

I noticed a user claimed the old rag about the dossier being used to secure a fisa warrant:

Read the Nunes memo again, user. Carefully. Even House republicans know the memo was only one piece of information among any that was presented to secure a renewal at some stage. Doesn’t mean there aren’t still many other pieces of evidence that warranted the renewals. Even the memo didn’t dare assert otherwise - trust me, I checked thoroughly. Through clever wordplay and spin House Republicans wanted you to believe as much if you skimmed through the claims. If that was the story you’d hear that line in the media for the last few months: “that’s all they had to go on;” “no other credible evidence;” “solely because of a phony dossier;” etc

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

I keep hearing Trumo ‘lost’ the popular vote.  This is incorrect, IMO, as Trump and Clinton did not campaign after the popular vote because it is not the method used to get one elected.  If the presidency was determined by popular vote who knows what would have happened as the candidates would have campaigned differently.  Trump merely did not get as many total votes as Clinton… and it means absolutely nothing, IMO.

This has got to win post of the day, week, month, year.

Trump didn't lose the popular vote, he just didn't get as many votes as HC.

That, sir, is a special kind of thinking you've got going on!

In order to win or lose, there has to be a contest or competition for it. In this, he is correct, as neither side was really trying to contest it (or at least, if the were, they were seriously misguided in doing so). Can’t really lose anything if you’re not in the contest to begin with.

Moving away from Trump, to things which actually affect us here.

Meanwhile, here in California, Gavin Newsom has made his future plans clear. He is only willing to contemplate a nationally televised debate on CNN against his Republican opponent for State Governor. To a point, he is right, he has absolutely nothing to gain by debating Cox, he is in a winning position right now for the State, and so may as well position himself on the national stage for the future, answering the sorts of questions that CNN national may ask. That doesn’t stop him getting a bit of a slating in the local media about not being willing to talk about things Californians are concerned about, such as cost of living, state taxes, high speed rail etc in favor of national issues.

You may have noticed California getting a bit of a slating in social media this month. Serving a drink with a plastic straw can now come with a six month jail sentence in Santa Barbara (just a $1,000 fine in SF), San Francisco has banned workplace cafeterias and electric scooters, whereas folks are more worried about the homeless problem, human waste and needles on the streets, public transport, and the like.

And in the gun world, 3D printed guns become uncontested tonight (DoJ accepted that they had no legal basis to prohibit publication of plans), and last week the 9th Circuit ruled a Constitutional right to openly bear firearms given that states like Hawaii and California have chosen not to generally permit concealed firearms.

Cheerful Spring

amandstu wrote: »

It is a bad thing to undermine Trump or a bad thing to have a broad community of present and past intelligence officers?

The credibility of these reports is lessened by the fact that they show the dear President in a bad light?

Perhaps the intelligence community could get in a table around the President and say what a great leader he is and there could be a coalition of loyalty to Trump so that all would be well in the boardroom.

Soon as I saw the intelligence came from an unnamed intelligence source and the newspapers all started talking about Trump being played I knew this was made up story. Then I read the article and was clear the evidence was weak. The evidence is based on activity at the known site and that could mean anything literally they repairing dismantling doing other work who bloody well knows. The report doesn't even claim they have seen a new NK missile, so it curious why all the papers are running with this story?

notobtuse

Midlife wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

You are incorrect about me and the birther issue.  I believed Obama was born in the US.  But Obama played it up good...  He could have released his birth certificate much earlier but didn't to gain political favor, IMO.

OK, apologies for the assumption.

So what do you make about Trump's motives for following it for so long?

is he just a pathelogical liar who didn't like Obama, a man who believes in tin-foil hat theories, or a racist?

Not too sure.  But if I had to guess I'd say Trump was looking for more political recognition on the national level, perhaps with the thought he might run for POTUS later on.  And if I had to guess I'd say Obama was all to happy to play along.  It made Trump look petty before the election and Obama the bigger person, and afterwards took away reporting from the unpopular Obamacare fight at the time.

notobtuse

Leroy42 wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

You are incorrect about me and the birther issue.  I believed Obama was born in the US.  But Obama played it up good...  He could have released his birth certificate much earlier but didn't to gain political favor, IMO.

What political favor?  Is this the deep seated love of foreigners we hear so much about?  You think he got more votes because people believed he wasn't actually born in the USA?

So, if as you say you believed that Obama was born in the USA, do you accept that Trump carried out a failed attempt to undermine the legitimate POTUS by lying and making up false allegations?

Political favor because it made Obama look like the bigger man at the time, IMO.  And Trump wanted proof...  Nothing wrong with that.

Captain Obvious

notobtuse wrote: »

Political favor because it made Obama look like the bigger man at the time, IMO. And Trump wanted proof... Nothing wrong with that.

What aroused his suspicion do you think?

Cheerful Spring

notobtuse wrote: »

I keep hearing Trumo ‘lost’ the popular vote.  This is incorrect, IMO, as Trump and Clinton did not campaign after the popular vote because it is not the method used to get one elected.  If the presidency was determined by popular vote who knows what would have happened as the candidates would have campaigned differently.  Trump merely did not get as many total votes as Clinton… and it means absolutely nothing, IMO.

I get what you're saying but the first line confusing Hilary won the popular vote if the election was like ours she is president. I guess the problem would there be enough Republicans to vote Trump if the election was a popular vote next election. There was argument black and Hispanics would vote Democrat and surprisingly Trump did well in these communities. The next election will be interesting because economically you think these communities will choose a candidate who good for the economy.

notobtuse

Captain Obvious wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

Political favor because it made Obama look like the bigger man at the time, IMO.  And Trump wanted proof...  Nothing wrong with that.

What aroused his suspicion do you think?

I don't think it was suspicion, bur rather Trump just picked something that was getting a lot of media attention and ran with it knowing it would get him a lot of air and print time.

Captain Obvious

notobtuse wrote: »

I don't think it was suspicion, bur rather Trump just picked something that was getting a lot of media attention and ran with it knowing it would get him a lot of air and print time.

Seems pretty dishonest and disingenuous.

Cheerful Spring

Wasn't their poll done recently showing Trump approval rating among Republicans are 88 per cent and 20 per cent democrat. That could mean another term for Trump.

Christy42

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

amandstu wrote: »

It is a bad thing to undermine Trump or a bad thing to have a broad community of present and past intelligence officers?

The credibility of these reports is lessened by the fact that they show the dear President in a bad light?

Perhaps the intelligence community could get in a table around the President and say what a great leader he is and there could be a coalition of loyalty to Trump so that all would be well in the boardroom.

Soon as I saw the intelligence came from an unnamed intelligence source and the newspapers all started talking about Trump being played I knew this was made up story. Then I read the article and was clear the evidence was weak. The evidence is based on activity at the known site and that could mean anything literally they repairing dismantling doing other work who bloody well knows. The report doesn't even claim they have seen a new NK missile, so it curious why all the papers are running with this story?

Given the similarities between the north Korea and Iran negotiations it has to be said that the media waited for far more evidence than Trump did.

As for what they are doing North Korea is unlikely to start disarming places they don't have from agreements and I don't think they were tourists!

notobtuse

Captain Obvious wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

I don't think it was suspicion, bur rather Trump just picked something that was getting a lot of media attention and ran with it knowing it would get him a lot of air and print time.

Seems pretty dishonest and disingenuous.

Perhaps, but as it turns out politically savvy if he did it for the reasons I mentioned.

StringerBell

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/31/politics/donald-trump-rudy-giuliani/index.html

Makes a pretty good argument, which is one that has been made before and I guess understood by many anyway. That this will play out in the court of public opinion, Rudy said as much shortly after he got involved also of I'm not mistaken

Captain Obvious

notobtuse wrote: »

Perhaps, but as it turns out politically savvy if he did it for the reasons I mentioned.

but does the end justify the means?

notobtuse

Captain Obvious wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

Perhaps, but as it turns out politically savvy if he did it for the reasons I mentioned.

but does the end justify the means?

Depends.  Turns out the outcome sure was good for America, IMO.  IMO, Trump is probably the greatest US president in modern times... following the worst president in US history who in large part was responsible for Trump becoming POTUS.

Water John

Stringer, it might be true for Donald himself, that the court will be, public opinion. But that doesn't hold for many others, including his less than bright son.
Misleading an FBI, Special Counsel of Congress are serious offences. These type of offences end up, in a Court of Law, before a Judge and Jury.

Want to see Donald, pardoning his own son?

Captain Obvious

notobtuse wrote: »

Depends. Turns out the outcome sure was good for America, IMO. IMO, Trump is probably the greatest US president in modern times... following the worst president in US history who in large part was responsible for Trump becoming POTUS.

By what metrics are you comparing them?


If you believe the end justifies the means then why is it you have an issue with the Mueller investigations origins when it has resulted in 32 individuals being indicted on over a hundred separate charges?

notobtuse

Water John wrote: »

Stringer, it might be true for Donald himself, that the court will be, public opinion. But that doesn't hold for many others, including his less than bright son.
Misleading an FBI, Special Counsel of Congress are serious offences. These type of offences end up, in a Court of Law, before a Judge and Jury.

Want to see Donald, pardoning his own son?

It might make sense to pardon everyone.  If the majority of the public believes the Muller investigation to be a witch hunt based on dirty politics by Hillary Clinton and the DNC, a pardon by Trump won't hurt him too much politically, IMO.  The main thing most American's believe in, IMO, is a fair fight... and this investigation is looking to be based on a dirty fight.  Trump may very well win in the battle for public favor in all this.

Harika

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Wasn't their poll done recently showing Trump approval rating among Republicans are 88 per cent and 20 per cent democrat. That could mean another term for Trump.

No, first of all there is no democratic contender available. Second: There is still voter turnout. Third, the electorate collage, Hillary won the popular vote but lost. So it basically is totally open.

StringerBell

Water John wrote: »

Stringer, it might be true for Donald himself, that the court will be, public opinion. But that doesn't hold for many others, including his less than bright son.
Misleading an FBI, Special Counsel of Congress are serious offences. These type of offences end up, in a Court of Law, before a Judge and Jury.

Want to see Donald, pardoning his own son?

Want to see? No, but probably will. If he is successful and wins the pr battle he will simply use that as an excuse to commute or pardon. He will just say the whole thing is a witch Hunt and why should his son suffer because they failed to frame him

Ah I see the chap has already detailed why he would, and probably will do it.

Water John

Once the Mueller Report is public and and legal prosecutions done, then it will even up, in public discourse terms. Those speaking in support of Muellers findings have a clear document with which to make their argument. ATM Trump and Guliani have a free run. They can say what they will, porkies and all.

StringerBell

Water John wrote: »

Once the Mueller Report is public and and legal prosecutions done, then it will even up, in public discourse terms. Those speaking in support of Muellers findings have a clear document with which to make their argument. ATM Trump and Guliani have a free run. They can say what they will, porkies and all.

They have a free run and they are laying the groundwork for their rebuttal of the report. The attacks on the investigation and attempts to discredit have been there from day 1.

They have the upper hand and barring something huge that simply cannot be disparaged no matter how they try to muddy the water I don't see a way out of that.

Mueller has to stay quiet, of course but it doesn't help his case with the public who love a story and when one side gets to embed their own version and discredit for months and months unanswered that is sure to play a role.

Manic Moran

notobtuse wrote: »

It might make sense to pardon everyone.  If the majority of the public believes the Muller investigation to be a witch hunt based on dirty politics by Hillary Clinton and the DNC, a pardon by Trump won't hurt him too much politically, IMO.  The main thing most American's believe in, IMO, is a fair fight... and this investigation is looking to be based on a dirty fight.  Trump may very well win in the battle for public favor in all this.

That’s something of a big ‘if’, though, isn’t it? I don’t believe that to be the case, or even close to it. Maybe there is a poll I missed, but I thought the predominant sentiment was that it’s worth looking into, but that the final result is going to be far less dramatic than a number on the left believe or hope it will be.

Beechwoodspark

The mid terms will be crucial.

If they go in favorite of the Democrats I can see the trump presidency being a total and utter disaster.

If they go republican then I’d bet he will get a second term.

notobtuse

Captain Obvious wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

Depends.  Turns out the outcome sure was good for America, IMO.  IMO, Trump is probably the greatest US president in modern times... following the worst president in US history who in large part was responsible for Trump becoming POTUS.

By what metrics are you comparing them?


If you believe the end justifies the means then why is it you have an issue with the Mueller investigations origins when it has resulted in 32 individuals being indicted on over a hundred separate charges?

MY metrics and MY opinion…

Trump greatness…
He has done more for conservatives than any other president, continues to remove burdensome government regulations throughout many different bureaucracies, doing extremely well at appointing judges, overseeing soaring economic growth and job creation, defeated the military might of ISIS, and bringing back America’s manufacturing capability… and all in less than two years.  Just think of what we’ll see in the next two years.


Obama worst…
He weaponized the government against his enemies, oversaw a 64% increase in a surveillance state, the worst economic recovery in our history, single-handily created the largest deficits in our history, responsible in large part for the creation of ISIS, and ObamaCare.

notobtuse

Manic Moran wrote: »

notobtuse wrote: »

It might make sense to pardon everyone.  If the majority of the public believes the Muller investigation to be a witch hunt based on dirty politics by Hillary Clinton and the DNC, a pardon by Trump won't hurt him too much politically, IMO.  The main thing most American's believe in, IMO, is a fair fight... and this investigation is looking to be based on a dirty fight.  Trump may very well win in the battle for public favor in all this.

That’s something of a big ‘if’, though, isn’t it? I don’t believe that to be the case, or even close to it. Maybe there is a poll I missed, but I thought the predominant sentiment was that it’s worth looking into, but that the final result is going to be far less dramatic than a number on the left believe or hope it will be.

It's been going on for something like two years now.  Doesn't even seem to be about Russian collusion anymore.  With all the leaks to the media from both sides if there was a there there we would certainly have known by now, IMO.