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

Gbear

Quin_Dub wrote: »

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.



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..

Although, if the Democrats began proceedings, it could well prove politically advisable to support it for Republicans.

Beyond the cult of Trump, there's still plenty of other Republican voters who need to be courted, and so long as it's their team attacking would probably be happy to pile in on Trump.

While the numbers of Republicans who support Trump is depressingly high, it'd be interesting to see how many would also prefer to see him replaced by another, more orthodox Republican.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

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)

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.

This is ridiculous. Why would the Russians hide who they were? Maybe initially but certainly before they hand over any info they think they have.

It is a little hard to pay someone back quid pro quo if you don't know who they are.

Anyway absolutely nothing suggests that Trump's lackeys did not know who they were getting involved with.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

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.

In the context of proving Trump knew in advance, Cohen has said he will testify to that. The penny just dropped with me that Gates has already done so.

That's two plus witnesses, and poss emails?

Re Manafort - Yes, but his working for Trump for free while broke may be explored as to why and is within the remit of the trial.... I think?

Hande hoche!

Gbear wrote: »

Although, if the Democrats began proceedings, it could well prove politically advisable to support it for Republicans.

Beyond the cult of Trump, there's still plenty of other Republican voters who need to be courted, and so long as it's their team attacking would probably be happy to pile in on Trump.

While the numbers of Republicans who support Trump is depressingly high, it'd be interesting to see how many would also prefer to see him replaced by another, more orthodox Republican.

Quite a few of the more vocal Republican critics like Corker or Flake are retiring. Then you have McCain as well. So there would be less to pile on than before.


Could see Romney filling that role to an extent.

Water John

If the House flips in Nov, Trump may be of a mind to move on as he will be very hamstrung at getting anything done. What will hinder this move is that, once he resigns, he may be open to criminal prosecution for taxes etc. He would need immunity from Pence to make the leap. No doubt it would be forthcoming.

Christy42

In other news Iran has declared it is willing to talk (and suggesting heavily that it feels Trump's offer to talk was propaganda). The EU has also vowed to protect any companies doing business in Iran in an attempt to save the deal.

His stance on the Paris agreement is also looking dumber by the (very sweaty) day.

Gbear

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Quite a few of the more vocal Republican critics like Corker or Flake are retiring. Then you have McCain as well. So there would be less to pile on than before.


Could see Romney filling that role to an extent.

I think the trick there is that they're vocal critics because they're retiring. They have nothing to lose and can speak their mind.

I'm sure most Republican politicians know that Trump is fundamentally toxic and would only need an excuse or smell blood to turn on him. It's up to the Democrats to make that happen.

everlast75

Water John wrote: »

If the House flips in Nov, Trump may be of a mind to move on as he will be very hamstrung at getting anything done. What will hinder this move is that, once he resigns, he may be open to criminal prosecution for taxes etc. He would need immunity from Pence to make the leap. No doubt it would be forthcoming.

Quite possible on both points.

On your first, he will say that he did all he could, government is corrupt, deep state blah blah blah and step down. His supporters will believe all his nonsense, and to be blunt, he and his 28% or so can have each other and **** off.

pixelburp

Water John wrote: »

If the House flips in Nov, Trump may be of a mind to move on as he will be very hamstrung at getting anything done. What will hinder this move is that, once he resigns, he may be open to criminal prosecution for taxes etc. He would need immunity from Pence to make the leap. No doubt it would be forthcoming.

As time has gone on and conspiracies revealed themselves, Trumps refusal to release his tax returns back in 2016 has become more and more suspicious. It's an open secret at this stage he pursued 'alternative' sources of credit when banks started refusing his business after the 08 crash, and given all that's coming out in the wash, impeachment still feels unlikely - but prosecution for tax and financial crimes has a more realistic ring to it. In hardly seems a stretch to speculate that he's up to his neck in dodgy Russian money and knows it.

mcmoustache

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Quite like that. Will remember if for the future.

I can't take credit. I saw it somewhere else and it stuck.

robinph

Water John wrote: »

If the House flips in Nov, Trump may be of a mind to move on as he will be very hamstrung at getting anything done. What will hinder this move is that, once he resigns, he may be open to criminal prosecution for taxes etc. He would need immunity from Pence to make the leap. No doubt it would be forthcoming.

Would a flipped house be inclined to impeach Pence for giving a pardon to a massive tax evading criminal who brought the country, presidency and democracy into disrepute and letting them escape justice?

Unlikely, but we can dream.

Leroy42

Pence is going nowhere, you can be sure he has stayed at arms length over much of these, what the term plausible deniability?

There won't be the e-mails etc that link him, not enough to impeach and certainly not in the time frame of 2020.

mcmoustache

Leroy42 wrote: »

Pence is going nowhere, you can be sure he has stayed at arms length over much of these, what the term plausible deniability?

There won't be the e-mails etc that link him, not enough to impeach and certainly not in the time frame of 2020.

This is one of the reasons that I think will make Democrats choose not to impeach. When 2020 comes around, it may be easier for them to take on the Republicans with Trump still in the mix.

Pence, outside of lying about Russian contacts, hasn't been implicated by any information in the public domain. That's not to say that there isn't anything tying him to the Russia stuff, but he has shown himself to be smart enough to avoid the appearance of impropriety. That's not easy, especially with so much scrutiny.

DrumSteve

If the Dems try to impeach Trump I 100% believe he will push for a civil war.

It's what he's been leading up to.

Water John

Once Trump becomes a liability the GOP will move him and replace with Pence. Might be sooner after midterms to leave Pence time to run in 2020.

everlast75

DrumSteve wrote: »

If the Dems try to impeach Trump I 100% believe he will push for a civil war.

It's what he's been leading up to.

so what?

If Mueller releases his report and there are sufficient grounds, the threat of anything should not dissuade the Dems, or anyone else, from doing the right thing.

Bullies should be faced down.

amandstu

Christy42 wrote: »

This is ridiculous. Why would the Russians hide who they were? Maybe initially but certainly before they hand over any info they think they have.

It is a little hard to pay someone back quid pro quo if you don't know who they are.

Anyway absolutely nothing suggests that Trump's lackeys did not know who they were getting involved with.

Surely they would deny as much as they possibly could. They would be quite happy for Trump or his camp to join the dots but they surely need to retain a fig leaf of deniability at all times.It would be par for the course for any secret service.

DrumSteve

Water John wrote: »

Once Trump becomes a liability the GOP will move him and replace with Pence. Might be sooner after midterms to leave Pence time to run in 2020.

If they wait til after the midterms can Pence potentially run for two terms?

DrumSteve

everlast75 wrote: »

so what?

If Mueller releases his report and there are sufficient grounds, the threat of anything should not dissuade the Dems, or anyone else, from doing the right thing.

Bullies should be faced down.

They should, but trump attacking this for so long means there is a massive cohort of people out there who, no matter what is in this report, will believe it's fake.

I'm not saying they shouldn't, I'm just saying don't be surprised if he sends out tweets pushing for an uprising.

Igotadose

DrumSteve wrote: »

If they wait til after the midterms can Pence potentially run for two terms?

He's never been elected President before, so yes.

everlast75

Igotadose wrote: »

He's never been elected President before, so yes.

in that case, Biden should run with Obama for VP

Quin_Dub

DrumSteve wrote: »

If they wait til after the midterms can Pence potentially run for two terms?

Depends on when exactly he took office..

If he took Office after January 19th 2019 then he could run in both 2020 and 2024..

22nd Amendment allows for this - Basically if he were to serve as President for less than 50% of the duration of the cycle it doesn't count against him running/being elected twice like anybody else.

Water John

Their is a whole cohort of GOP voters out there too who believe the world was made in 7 days about 4,000 years ago. It up to the overwhelming majority to tell them, take a hike.
Their is real news and fake news. It needs to be called out, every time.

DrumSteve

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Depends on when exactly he took office..

If he took Office after January 19th 2019 then he could run in both 2020 and 2024..

22nd Amendment allows for this - Basically if he were to serve as President for less than 50% of the duration of the cycle it doesn't count against him running/being elected twice like anybody else.

So really, any push from the GOP against Trump is not going to take place this year (if it is at all).

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

in that case, Biden should run with Obama for VP

That's an interesting one - Not specifically Obama , but can a former POTUS be selected as VP?

All previous POTUS have left politics when they leave office , but is there any legal imepediment to them standing for Election again - Senator , Governor or whatever?

Water John

From the GOP it would be after midterms, and allowing for the VP situation, in the new year at best. Other reasons might dictate earlier, which I doubt.

Igotadose

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Depends on when exactly he took office..

If he took Office after January 19th 2019 then he could run in both 2020 and 2024..

22nd Amendment allows for this - Basically if he were to serve as President for less than 50% of the duration of the cycle it doesn't count against him running/being elected twice like anybody else.

A better answer than mine, thanks. I'd missed the part about him serving due to impeachment. As for Biden with Obama as VP, the 12th amendment states 'no one ineligible to be President can be Vice President. Some constitutional debate took place around the time HRC was running as to whether Bill could be Vice President, and Bill said it'd be out of the spirit of the Constitution, which doesn't explicitly say 'run' just hold the office.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/82472/could-former-president-ever-become-vice-president

Quin_Dub

DrumSteve wrote: »

So really, any push from the GOP against Trump is not going to take place this year (if it is at all).

There will never be a push against Trump from the GOP..

They might row in behind a Democrat led Impeachment if they feel the writing is on the wall and it's the only way for them to survive but they'll never pull the trigger themselves..

JohnFalstaff

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That's an interesting one - Not specifically Obama , but can a former POTUS be selected as VP?

All previous POTUS have left politics when they leave office , but is there any legal imepediment to them standing for Election again - Senator , Governor or whatever?

It's debatable as to whether a former two-term POTUS, like Obama, can be selected as a VP. The problem would arise if he was to step into the President's role, thus becoming President for a third time.

The debate lies in whether or not that would constitute being 'elected' to the position of president or not. The 22nd Amendment states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice."

Some constitutional scholars have argued it would be possible.

Penn

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That's an interesting one - Not specifically Obama , but can a former POTUS be selected as VP?

All previous POTUS have left politics when they leave office , but is there any legal imepediment to them standing for Election again - Senator , Governor or whatever?

From the 12th Amendment:
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

So I don't think a former POTUS who has served two terms can then go for VP, as being ineligible to the office of President excludes them.