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

MadYaker

I still think he's going to last the full term. I also don't think the GOP will lose congress this year. Young people in the US still don't vote and that's what's needed to bring change.

Captain Obvious

MadYaker wrote: »

I still think he's going to last the full term. I also don't think the GOP will lose congress this year. Young people in the US still don't vote and that's what's needed to bring change.

I think he'll be dead before the end of his first term.

Gbear

Captain Obvious wrote: »

I think he'll be dead before the end of his first term.

You could certainly see someone having a pop at him if he successfully dismantles the Mueller investigation before it bears fruit.

Or do you just mean he's elderly and extremely unhealthy?

Water John

The simple standard is, by this cooperating with Russians, left Trump totally compromised as POTUS.
That is why it's unacceptable. A simple test would be would he actually get FBI security clearance if he had to apply for it?
Also all of us, can witness by his actions that he is compromised in relation to Russia.

Leroy42

And of course another serious question needs to be asked. Cohen is saying that Trump knew, Trump denies it.

Since Trump has lied about this from the start it is hard to take his word on it, or those around him. But if he was 'at' the meeting, either physically of by phone, then Putin would know, Putin would know that Trump was desperately trying to cover it up.

Putin would have known that Trump was lying about the meeting when the WH released the statement. Are we supposed to believe that Putin simply sat on his hands when presented with such an opportunity? It would be negligent of him to do so.

So what price did Putin extract from Trump in order to stay quiet? And it doesn't even have to be true, Putin knows the power of him letting it be known that Trump was there. He could easily have threatened Trump with saying Trump was there to get what he wanted.

And all because Trump lied about it. That is why these things are so dangerous. Its not the initial meeting, it is the potential for blackmail that such a meeting creates.

aloyisious

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Wrong because the only way this harms trump if its proven Russians went away from this meeting went back to Moscow and met with people in the GRU to start the process of trying to get more information to damage Hilary. The info talked about in these emails exchanges is not going to doing to damage Trump. Republicans are hardly going to impeach Trump for receiving info about Hilary deals with Russia they probably say that's ok knowing them. What would really get them going if the Trump team asked the Russians to do things like hacking the DNC and this can be found out?

Maybe you should google on the history of the female Russian lawyer at the meeting. She wasn't there as a secretary but as the lead from the Russian side. She has form as a Russian Government covert agent and as a person with direct connections to it's intelligence agencies. It seems likely that Don didn't really need to ask the Russians Govt to hack the DNC [if he even had intelligence enough to think of such a complex idea] which would probably have been declined by the Russians. They'd be well ahead of him in such games so the idea that the tail [Don] would wag the dog [Russia] doesn't add up.

20Cent

Rick Gate in court at the moment admitting multiple crimes with Manafort.



Mr. Gates admitted to a wide variety of crimes, including bank fraud, tax fraud, money laundering, lying to federal authorities, lying in a court deposition and stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from Mr. Manafort’s accounts by falsely claiming expenses.

Cheerful Spring

aloyisious wrote: »

Maybe you should google on the history of the female Russian lawyer at the meeting. She wasn't there as a secretary but as the lead from the Russian side. She has form as a Russian Government covert agent and as a person with direct connections to it's intelligence agencies. It seems likely that Don didn't really need to ask the Russians Govt to hack the DNC [if he even had intelligence enough to think of such a complex idea] which would probably have been declined by the Russians. They'd be well ahead of him in such games so the idea that the tail [Don] would wag the dog [Russia] doesn't add up.

Well, thats a problematic for Trump there no way around it this meeting could be why his presidency ends. It really strange occurrence though weeks after this meeting the DNC server got hacked. Did she go home after this meeting call a team together and roll the ball to get the GRU to start hacking I curious if this how it played out behind the scenes?

Cheerful Spring

20Cent wrote: »

Rick Gate in court at the moment admitting multiple crimes with Manafort.



Mr. Gates admitted to a wide variety of crimes, including bank fraud, tax fraud, money laundering, lying to federal authorities, lying in a court deposition and stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from Mr. Manafort’s accounts by falsely claiming expenses.

He was Trump campaign manager you got to wonder now was Trump laundering money too and with who? Would be unreal if it was Trump was brought down like Al Capone.

Cheerful Spring

MadYaker wrote: »

I still think he's going to last the full term. I also don't think the GOP will lose congress this year. Young people in the US still don't vote and that's what's needed to bring change.

I would have said yes two days ago but he pretty evident now the Trump team worked with Russian citizens to undermine the election. I not sure how Trump can continue to call that fake news when he admitted to this happening in his tweet yesterday. Trump has comprised his own win admitting he got help from a foreign government. Can you really allow him to remain the President after this if this meeting resulted in the hacking of democratic server? You pretty much condoning cyber attacks on US politicians and US institutions and saying thats not illegal what?

The information they released exposed corruption in the DNC but you still should not be thinking its ok for foreign governments to be hacking another country servers. If the British were hacking servers in Ireland to undermine our election we be upset too. I just wish it was not Mike Pence who will replace him.

Manic Moran

amandstu wrote: »

Would it be alright for all the different political parties to deal with different foreign secret services to get the dirt on the others at election time? (call upon them openly to hack their opponents' emails</joke>)

So the Dems could use the German intelligence agencies and the Greens could use the Chinese?

Would that work?

If it would not be OK what sanctions should there be?

The theory is fine, but unless the campaigns flat refused to view or use any information which did not come from their internal sources, what's the difference?

"Joe! Joe! I just got this email from a person named "TennesseeFriend501 with an audio recording/screen-grab/evidence of (whatever) which we can use against our opponent. He says he'll provide more..."
"Does he sign off with 'Dasvidanya, Tovarisch?'"
"Nope, he signed off with "Take care, y'all"
"Ah, fine. He's obviously not Russian intelligence service. We can deal with him".

There's obviously a sliding scale here. "Hey, if you give me dirt on X, I'll remove tariffs on your products" is plain wrong. Saying directly to the FSB head "If you give me dirt on X, I'll appreciate it" is questionable. Publicly saying at a random event "I wish someone would send me dirt on X" and then the Russians provide anonymously the information has basically the same effect on the campaign, but doesn't have the same optics problems.

It's the quid pro quo one has to look out for. Accepting the gift with the intent of adjusting your policy as a result. That's not a matter of the foreign intelligence service, that's an ethical problem if the quid-pro-quo is domestic or foreign. Unfortunately, I also strongly suspect that such things are routine on the domestic level as well.

amandstu

Manic Moran wrote: »

The theory is fine, but unless the campaigns flat refused to view or use any information which did not come from their internal sources, what's the difference?

"Joe! Joe! I just got this email from a person named "TennesseeFriend501 with an audio recording/screen-grab/evidence of (whatever) which we can use against our opponent. He says he'll provide more..."
"Does he sign off with 'Dasvidanya, Tovarisch?'"
"Nope, he signed off with "Take care, y'all"
"Ah, fine. He's obviously not Russian intelligence service. We can deal with him".

There's obviously a sliding scale here. "Hey, if you give me dirt on X, I'll remove tariffs on your products" is plain wrong. Saying directly to the FSB head "If you give me dirt on X, I'll appreciate it" is questionable. Publicly saying at a random event "I wish someone would send me dirt on X" and then the Russians provide anonymously the information has basically the same effect on the campaign, but doesn't have the same optics problems.

It's the quid pro quo one has to look out for. Accepting the gift with the intent of adjusting your policy as a result. That's not a matter of the foreign intelligence service, that's an ethical problem if the quid-pro-quo is domestic or foreign. Unfortunately, I also strongly suspect that such things are routine on the domestic level as well.

My personal opinion counts for little but this latest confirmation was not necessary for me to have felt all along that this election was not kosher.

Fine ,one can say the US deserves what it "voted" for and accepts the "result"
of -and it never occurred to me that there might be an actually concrete quid pro pro for favours from a foreign (esp Russia or Chinese) government.

That the Trump campaign had trashed democratic ideals was in my mind enough that something had to be done.(the hope being that those close to the cabal (can we call it thus?) could have the nous and the balls do sort this out.


Also the loyalty of his base has been utterly demoralising as they could have ,by their lack of support at least softened his cough.

Every new revelation seem to have no effect on his support The term "dotard" seems to be being "worn with pride" around the country .

listermint

Manic Moran wrote: »

The theory is fine, but unless the campaigns flat refused to view or use any information which did not come from their internal sources, what's the difference?

"Joe! Joe! I just got this email from a person named "TennesseeFriend501 with an audio recording/screen-grab/evidence of (whatever) which we can use against our opponent. He says he'll provide more..."
"Does he sign off with 'Dasvidanya, Tovarisch?'"
"Nope, he signed off with "Take care, y'all"
"Ah, fine. He's obviously not Russian intelligence service. We can deal with him".

There's obviously a sliding scale here. "Hey, if you give me dirt on X, I'll remove tariffs on your products" is plain wrong. Saying directly to the FSB head "If you give me dirt on X, I'll appreciate it" is questionable. Publicly saying at a random event "I wish someone would send me dirt on X" and then the Russians provide anonymously the information has basically the same effect on the campaign, but doesn't have the same optics problems.

It's the quid pro quo one has to look out for. Accepting the gift with the intent of adjusting your policy as a result. That's not a matter of the foreign intelligence service, that's an ethical problem if the quid-pro-quo is domestic or foreign. Unfortunately, I also strongly suspect that such things are routine on the domestic level as well.

Has it gotten to the stage when military personal are now okay with foreign powers meddling in your internal elections . because you know I'm sure it happens on the local level too.

It's a head scratcher that this is what you are peddling manic and even with your repeated claims of voting for Obama ( I've no doubt you did btw) I really don't think you would let this fly or even start to defend it in any way if him and his reports tried the same thing with a foreign government.

You'd be livid.

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

The theory is fine, but unless the campaigns flat refused to view or use any information which did not come from their internal sources, what's the difference?

"Joe! Joe! I just got this email from a person named "TennesseeFriend501 with an audio recording/screen-grab/evidence of (whatever) which we can use against our opponent. He says he'll provide more..."
"Does he sign off with 'Dasvidanya, Tovarisch?'"
"Nope, he signed off with "Take care, y'all"
"Ah, fine. He's obviously not Russian intelligence service. We can deal with him".

There's obviously a sliding scale here. "Hey, if you give me dirt on X, I'll remove tariffs on your products" is plain wrong. Saying directly to the FSB head "If you give me dirt on X, I'll appreciate it" is questionable. Publicly saying at a random event "I wish someone would send me dirt on X" and then the Russians provide anonymously the information has basically the same effect on the campaign, but doesn't have the same optics problems.

It's the quid pro quo one has to look out for. Accepting the gift with the intent of adjusting your policy as a result. That's not a matter of the foreign intelligence service, that's an ethical problem if the quid-pro-quo is domestic or foreign. Unfortunately, I also strongly suspect that such things are routine on the domestic level as well.

Nice attempt at shifting the goalposts. A bit of whataboutery gong on in that post.

None of what you propose actually happened though. Don Jr received an email form a business contact (which he can hardly recall because he was so busy but stil managed to reply to within minutes) that stated that it was part of the plan for Russia to help Trump in the election.

So no confusion there as to the type or people looking for the meeting or the purpose of it. He was also told they had dirt on HC. So now Djr knows, or at least has evidence of the potential, that a foreign government is attempting to influence US election.

If a soldier was contacted by a Russian looking to sell on state secrets the US government would expect that soldier/citizen to report that.

And yes these things happen domestically, and whilst it may not be nice at the very least it is in-house. This is clearly a step way beyond that.

Again, the question must be asked, is that it? Is this the only meeting? Did Russia simply accept that Don Jr wasn't happy and forget about it?

There is now the real possibility that Putin does indeed have something on Trump (if not the PEE tape then we know he has known about this all along) and what has a he sought to get from that? Is that why Trump has been so slow to introduce sanctions? IS that why he has said almost nothing about the attacks in the UK? Is that why he is trying to undermine NATO?

Can we be sure (no is the answer) that Trump won't do something again for 2020. And what price this time? Maybe handing over those people Putin wants to talks to? Maybe increase the undermining of NATO?

Dress it up anyway you like, this is a scandal bigger than Watergate. That the GOP and Trump supporters have sold the very notion of national security down the river to help Trump is staggering to me.

Trump keeps telling us that he is a genius etc, yet we are then supposed to believe this was all just naivety. That Trump Jr didn't really know what he was doing. That neither Jared or Manafort thought any of this was strange.

That within a few months of Manafort, a man with massive ties to Russia, coming on board, Russian was reaching out to the Trump campaign. And Manafort wouldn't have used his connections to verify who these people were and what they could bring?

everlast75

Manic Moran wrote: »

The theory is fine, but unless the campaigns flat refused to view or use any information which did not come from their internal sources, what's the difference?

"Joe! Joe! I just got this email from a person named "TennesseeFriend501 with an audio recording/screen-grab/evidence of (whatever) which we can use against our opponent. He says he'll provide more..."
"Does he sign off with 'Dasvidanya, Tovarisch?'"
"Nope, he signed off with "Take care, y'all"
"Ah, fine. He's obviously not Russian intelligence service. We can deal with him".

There's obviously a sliding scale here. "Hey, if you give me dirt on X, I'll remove tariffs on your products" is plain wrong. Saying directly to the FSB head "If you give me dirt on X, I'll appreciate it" is questionable. Publicly saying at a random event "I wish someone would send me dirt on X" and then the Russians provide anonymously the information has basically the same effect on the campaign, but doesn't have the same optics problems.

It's the quid pro quo one has to look out for. Accepting the gift with the intent of adjusting your policy as a result. That's not a matter of the foreign intelligence service, that's an ethical problem if the quid-pro-quo is domestic or foreign. Unfortunately, I also strongly suspect that such things are routine on the domestic level as well.

Name me one other situation in which a candidate got an email from a foreign power which offered political dirt on a rival, agreeing to meet with that knowledge in mind and then later, in the presidency, did anything comparable like causing trouble with the G7, Nato, UK, Canada (!), not imposing sanctions against Russia, agreeing in private to a new military strategy in Syria, refusing to criticize Russia for interfering with the election.. and all of this to the complete bewilderment of the intelligence and military service.

We are talking beyond a reasonable doubt that the campaign, including DJT colluded with a foreign power to steal the election, they knew what they asked for and did stuff in return.

8mv

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I would have said yes two days ago but he pretty evident now the Trump team worked with Russian citizens to undermine the election. I not sure how Trump can continue to call that fake news when he admitted to this happening in his tweet yesterday. Trump has comprised his own win admitting he got help from a foreign government. Can you really allow him to remain the President after this if this meeting resulted in the hacking of democratic server? You pretty much condoning cyber attacks on US politicians and US institutions and saying thats not illegal what?

The information they released exposed corruption in the DNC but you still should not be thinking its ok for foreign governments to be hacking another country servers. If the British were hacking servers in Ireland to undermine our election we be upset too. I just wish it was not Mike Pence who will replace him.

If the election itself was deemed compromised, would that not invalidate Pence as VP? Leaving Paul Ryan as next in line. Could that happen?

everlast75

8mv wrote: »

If the election itself was deemed compromised, would that not invalidate Pence as VP? Leaving Paul Ryan as next in line. Could that happen?

It would be a huge thing for Trump to be removed. It would be beyond that again to have Pence removed too.

There is a slight (I'd say 5%) chance Pence might find himself in trouble too. He was, after all, Manafort's pic for VP. Stories which are credible say that Romney was supposed to be the VP, but Russia had other ideas (Butina related story)

Hande hoche!

8mv wrote: »

If the election itself was deemed compromised, would that not invalidate Pence as VP? Leaving Paul Ryan as next in line. Could that happen?

Remember reading some fan fiction on Twitter about this. Ryan and Pence would also be compromised leading to Orrin Hatch becoming president. He would then resign giving the POTUS position to Hillary Clinton, the "true winner" of the election.

RobbingBandit

Can't see Hillary Clinton being awarded it, a recall election would be more appropriate but this far into his term it would be redundant I'd imagine too the republican party would have no choice but to disqualify Pence and so would run any candidate as they would be obliterated in the polls either way. Just like Nixon Trump is now and forever shall be President Trump come what may.

Hande hoche!

everlast75 wrote: »

It would be a huge thing for Trump to be removed. It would be beyond that again to have Pence removed too.

There is a slight (I'd say 5%) chance Pence might find himself in trouble too. He was, after all, Manafort's pic for VP. Stories which are credible say that Romney was supposed to be the VP, but Russia had other ideas (Butina related story)

Was the Romney veto not supposed to be in relation to the secretary of state position?



The picking of VP timing was closer to the Trump denunciation speech given by Romney.

everlast75

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Was the Romney veto not supposed to be in relation to the secretary of state position?



The picking of VP timing was closer to the Trump denunciation speech given by Romney.

Sorry. You are 100% correct.


So many scandals, its hard to keep them separated

Quin_Dub

8mv wrote: »

If the election itself was deemed compromised, would that not invalidate Pence as VP? Leaving Paul Ryan as next in line. Could that happen?

Whatever about the possibility of Trump being impeached , there is absolutely Zero chance of the election results being invalidated.

Regardless of how much evidence that might be found about attempts to collude with Russia being able to definitively link that with the specifics of the result are beyond impossible.

everlast75 wrote: »

It would be a huge thing for Trump to be removed. It would be beyond that again to have Pence removed too.

There is a slight (I'd say 5%) chance Pence might find himself in trouble too. He was, after all, Manafort's pic for VP. Stories which are credible say that Romney was supposed to be the VP, but Russia had other ideas (Butina related story)

Agreed - There is an extreme outside chance that hard evidence of Pence being aware of dodgy dealing by the Trump team comes to light leading to him also being impeached..

None of this will happen unless there is both evidence and a Democrat controlled house and senate as I truly believe there is no level of information that would trigger the GOP to support impeachment in any significant numbers..

Hande hoche!

everlast75 wrote: »

Sorry. You are 100% correct.


So many scandals, its hard to keep them separated

Well put. I struggle to keep up with them.

mcmoustache

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Remember reading some fan fiction on Twitter about this. Ryan and Pence would also be compromised leading to Orrin Hatch becoming president. He would then resign giving the POTUS position to Hillary Clinton, the "true winner" of the election.

I think that stuff originated with the Mensch Davidians on Twitter. Fan fiction is exactly what it was.

mcmoustache

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Agreed - There is an extreme outside chance that hard evidence of Pence being aware of dodgy dealing by the Trump team comes to light leading to him also being impeached..

None of this will happen unless there is both evidence and a Democrat controlled house and senate as I truly believe there is no level of information that would trigger the GOP to support impeachment in any significant numbers..

I think it's more realistic that Trump will see out the remainder of his term but the House Intelligence Committee will be in a position to do their jobs if the Democrats take the house. This would be an anchor around Trump's (and Republicans') neck for the following two years.

Quin_Dub

mcmoustache wrote: »

I think it's more realistic that Trump will see out the remainder of his term but the House Intelligence Committee will be in a position to do their jobs if the Democrats take the house. This would be an anchor around Trump's (and Republicans') neck for the following two years.

I suspect you are right.. I can't see the Democrats taking both the House and the Senate , but I think they'll take one.

On that basis , Trump remains , heavily hamstrung being, chased and hounded by whichever Intelligence Committee the Dems control for the remainder of his tenure..

everlast75

What are the odds Gates has testified that Trump knew about the meeting beforehand?

He is already cooperating.

Manafort knew, therefore its safe to say Gates knew.

breatheme

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Remember reading some fan fiction on Twitter about this. Ryan and Pence would also be compromised leading to Orrin Hatch becoming president. He would then resign giving the POTUS position to Hillary Clinton, the "true winner" of the election.

Doesn't work like that, you have to keep going down the line of succession. So after Hatch comes Pompeo.

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

What are the odds Gates has testified that Trump knew about the meeting beforehand?

He is already cooperating.

Manafort knew, therefore its safe to say Gates knew.

It's certain that he told Mueller; he took a deal and it's unlikely he would get a deal without spilling everything, truthfully.

But, there's no way that this came up yesterday. This particular trial, relates to fraud committed by Manafort and is kept quite separate from the upcoming trial in DC. The only connection that the fraud has to Trump is that some fraud took place while Manafort was campaign manager.

Hande hoche!

mcmoustache wrote: »

I think that stuff originated with the Mensch Davidians on Twitter. Fan fiction is exactly what it was.

Quite like that. Will remember if for the future.

breatheme wrote: »

Doesn't work like that, you have to keep going down the line of succession. So after Hatch comes Pompeo.

Yeah, think those behind that theory weren't too big on the details.