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

DrumSteve

Quin_Dub wrote: »

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..

Yeah I'd agree, the lunatics are running the asylum there at the moment.

If a faction was to try push him out you'd split the party.

Itssoeasy

I was reading about what rick gates said yesterday evening. The transcript read like a crap version of murder she wrote. I mean even Jessica fletcher had to do a bit of work to solve the crimes.

jobbridge4life

Quin_Dub wrote: »

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..

Not even if they were to see a real negative from continued support? As in electoral losses?

Captain Obvious

Penn wrote: »

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.

Obama is not ineligible to hold the post, he is ineligible to be elected to it. At least that's my understanding of it.

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.

Franz Von Peppercorn

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?

Your second paragraph is factually incorrect. So no there’s no legal impediment to being a senator or congressman. At least Three presidents have done it.


There are restrictions on the individual offices re term limits of course.

amandstu

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Not even if they were to see a real negative from continued support? As in electoral losses?

Of course,that is the game.

Trump's continued support is the real game changer and the ongoing mystery (to me).

Quin_Dub

DrumSteve wrote: »

Yeah I'd agree, the lunatics are running the asylum there at the moment.

If a faction was to try push him out you'd split the party.

To be honest the party is already split between "regular" Republicans and the more extreme right cohort. Just look at their inability to get anything passed other than the tax cut - Any other legislation was either too extreme for some or not extreme enough for others.

A huge number of the (on paper at least) moderate Republicans are stepping down in November so it remains to be seen if they get replaced by the more extreme types.

Gbear

Another concern with Trump is what he would do if he lost the 2020 election.

He'd have another few months left in the oval office. Nothing is beyond him in terms of causing havoc out of spite.

How much could he be limited in his power? Presumably he couldn't just nuke North Korea on a whim?

A friend of mine half-joked that they should just pretend that he wins and ferry him around the place and just indulge the fanasy of getting to be president, as if he was a small child with a terminal illness, until his term was over.

everlast75

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I was reading about what rick gates said yesterday evening. The transcript read like a crap version of murder she wrote. I mean even Jessica fletcher had to do a bit of work to solve the crimes.

Yep.

Manafort is mana****ed.

Documentary evidence is overwhelming and bookkeeper and gates will finish him off.

The best defence to the charges are that Gates did it. Other than that, its life in prison for him

Penn

Gbear wrote: »

Another concern with Trump is what he would do if he lost the 2020 election.

He'd have another few months left in the oval office. Nothing is beyond him in terms of causing havoc out of spite.

How much could he be limited in his power? Presumably he couldn't just nuke North Korea on a whim?

A friend of mine half-joked that they should just pretend that he wins and ferry him around the place and just indulge the fanasy of getting to be president, as if he was a small child with a terminal illness, until his term was over.

I'd almost think if the Dems won both houses in November, Trump would be happy enough to spend even more time golfing and just blame not being able to do anything substantial on the Dems blocking and obstructing him. If anything it'd be less stressful for him than not being able to destroy Obamacare and get funding for the Wall the past two years when Republicans have both Houses.

mcmoustache

Gbear wrote: »

A friend of mine half-joked that they should just pretend that he wins and ferry him around the place and just indulge the fanasy of getting to be president, as if he was a small child with a terminal illness, until his term was over.

Similar was done with Portugal's Salazar.

Despite the injury, Salazar lived for a further two years. When he unexpectedly recovered lucidity, his intimates did not tell him he had been removed from power, instead allowing him to "rule" in privacy until his death in July 1970.[90]

Back to Trump, assuming he loses in 2020 to a Democrat, things will depend on control of the house and senate. My guess is that it'll be a Dem house and Republican senate.

Water John

Highly unlikely Senate will flip, just House of Representatives, leading to stalemate as if it wasn't that way already with the GOP split as above post.

Christy42

amandstu wrote: »

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.

Well they had someone known for working with the Russian government at the meeting and Trump jnr said it was about adoptions so they knew it was the Russians.

Why make them join the dots? If the meeting was made public the CIA etc. would always join the dots themselves quicker than the Trump camp so there is no serious benefit to hiding from your partners. Maybe stay secret for the initial contact but the Russians would need to know the Trump camp are willing to deal with them before they hand over information.

Plus would you seriously be willing to let the success of a plan hinge on Trump solving a join the dots puzzle?

amandstu

Christy42 wrote: »

Well they had someone known for working with the Russian government at the meeting and Trump jnr said it was about adoptions so they knew it was the Russians.

Why make them join the dots? If the meeting was made public the CIA etc. would always join the dots themselves quicker than the Trump camp so there is no serious benefit to hiding from your partners. Maybe stay secret for the initial contact but the Russians would need to know the Trump camp are willing to deal with them before they hand over information.

Plus would you seriously be willing to let the success of a plan hinge on Trump solving a join the dots puzzle?

Why would Trump need to join the dots ? All he needs to know is that the new "partners" can do something to his benefit. If he suspects they may be linked to the Russian state he probably would have the reflex not to ask too directly.

How would he (or we) not know that the person he was dealing with was not a double agent if the waters are that murky?

I just doubt there would ever be any proof that Trump knew (or cared) 100% that he was dealing with the Russian state (or Russian mafia).

Perhaps the CIA could manufacture it if they were convinced it was necessary (if Trump really is completely venal and anti patriotic it might make sense)

Zubeneschamali

amandstu wrote: »

I just doubt there would ever be any proof that Trump knew (or cared) 100% that he was dealing with the Russian state (or Russian mafia).

On July 27th Trump openly called on Russia to hack and release Hillary's emails:

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press,"

Leroy42

amandstu wrote: »

Why would Trump need to join the dots ? All he needs to know is that the new "partners" can do something to his benefit. If he suspects they may be linked to the Russian state he probably would have the reflex not to ask too directly.

How would he (or we) not know that the person he was dealing with was not a double agent if the waters are that murky?

I just doubt there would ever be any proof that Trump knew (or cared) 100% that he was dealing with the Russian state (or Russian mafia).

Perhaps the CIA could manufacture it if they were convinced it was necessary (if Trump really is completely venal and anti patriotic it might make sense)

Because the e-mail that Don Jr received specifically mentioned that it was part of the plan for Russia to help Trump.

Manafort has significant ties to Russia and it would have been very easy for him to check with them as to the level of the people they would meet.

They are not going to meet some Lada dealers from Minsk.

Yo are giving a huge amount of benefit of the doubt to the very people that have lied continuously throughout.

At this stage, it really falls on Trump to explain what the hell was going on. Why he allowed the meeting to go ahead. Was he informed about it prior to getting security intel from FBI on possible interference and if so why he said nothing.
Why did he lie about the meeting in his statement from AF1.

Did he not know the full facts at the time? Does he recant his AF! statement now? Was he lying at the time?

What would he have done had he gotten intel (and we only have Don Jr and his word that they didn't). What price was he willing to pay? Why were Jared and Manafort brought to the meeting if it was just a get-to-know-you deal?

amandstu

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

On July 27th Trump openly called on Russia to hack and release Hillary's emails:

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press,"

That is true -and very true.. I thought he imagined that was "hiding in plain sight"

Also he may have thought that doing down an opponent (did he actually believe or just hope that those "missing emails" were incriminating?) was different from actively benefiting himself?

amandstu

Leroy42 wrote: »

Because the e-mail that Don Jr received specifically mentioned that it was part of the plan for Russia to help Trump.?

Is that email public now? Wouldn't that be treason not to inform the FBI immediately?

Leroy42

amandstu wrote: »

Is that email public now? Wouldn't that be treason not to inform the FBI immediately?

I have no idea why Trump Jr hasn't been arrested at this point.

amandstu

Leroy42 wrote: »

I have no idea why Trump Jr hasn't been arrested at this point.

A pawn in the game?

everlast75

amandstu wrote: »

Is that email public now? Wouldn't that be treason not to inform the FBI immediately?

July 12, 2017.

Christopher Wray, then nominee's hearing...



SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Should Donald Trump Jr. have taken that meeting?

CHRISTOPHER WRAY: Well, Senator I don't – I'm hearing for the first time your description of it so I'm not really in a position to speak to it. I gather that Special Counsel Mueller —

GRAHAM: Well, let me ask you this. If I got a call from somebody saying the Russian government wants to help Lindsey Graham get reelected, they've got dirt on Lindsey Graham's opponent, should I take that meeting?

WRAY: Well, Senator I would think you'd want to consult with some good legal advisers before you did that.

GRAHAM: So, the answer is, should I call the FBI?

WRAY: I think it would be wise to let the FBI know —

GRAHAM: You're going to be the director of the FBI bell. So, here's what I want you to tell every politician. If you get a call from somebody suggesting that a foreign government wants to help you by disparaging your opponent — tell us all to call the FBI.

WRAY: To the members of this committee, any threat or effort to interfere with our elections from any nation-state, or any non-state actor, is the kind of thing the FBI would want to know.

GRAHAM: Alright, so I'll take that we should call you, and that's a great answer. You say that Mueller's a good guy, right?

WRAY: That's been my experience, yes.

GRAHAM: And you'll do anything necessary to protect him from being interfered with when it comes to doing his job?

WRAY: Absolutely, I think —

GRAHAM: Do you believe that, in light of the Don Jr. email and other allegations, that this whole thing about Trump campaign and Russia is a witch hunt? Is that a fair description of what we're all dealing with in America?

WRAY: Well, Senator I can't speak to the basis for those comments. I can tell you that my experience with Director Mueller —

GRAHAM: I'm asking you, as the future FBI director, do you consider this endeavor a witch hunt?

WRAY: I do not consider Director Mueller to be on a witch hunt.

I don't know why Graham is not asked about this every time he sticks his face in front of a camera.

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

I have no idea why Trump Jr hasn't been arrested at this point.

To be honest, I reckon Mueller is just waiting for the right time, and making sure he has enough to make it bulletproof when he does it. Going after Trump's son will almost ensure Trump starts making moves to shut down the whole investigation. Mueller needs to have everything in place before before that happens, so that once Trump starts making his move, Mueller plays every card he has.

Quin_Dub

The whole Trump Tower meeting thing is just a mess..

They've lied about everything thus far.. The only as yet unverified piece of information in the public domain is that "the meeting came to nothing" - As told to us by the two Donalds , which makes it meaningless.

The only thing that kinda,sorta adds veracity to their statement is that fact that there was no big Clinton exposé as Donald snr had promised a few days before the meeting took place.

Having said that , the reason for that could be that the Russian grown ups at the meeting told them to cop on and not make things so bloody obvious!

DrumSteve

Leroy42 wrote: »

I have no idea why Trump Jr hasn't been arrested at this point.

The chap is so stupid it's easier to leave him to see what else he will blurt out.

Quin_Dub

Penn wrote: »

To be honest, I reckon Mueller is just waiting for the right time, and making sure he has enough to make it bulletproof when he does it. Going after Trump's son will almost ensure Trump starts making moves to shut down the whole investigation. Mueller needs to have everything in place before before that happens, so that once Trump starts making his move, Mueller plays every card he has.

To be honest I get a feeling that they've deliberately thrown Don Jr under the bus publically now , hoping that it forces Mueller or someone else to pull the trigger on charges , then Snr can pardon him and Jnr can go and manage a Trump resort in a non extradition country...

everlast75

as has been said here before, it could have been a blip at the start, if they played it right.

They could and should have come out at the start.


"We accept that taking the meeting was not the right thing to do. We hold our hands up. We were politically naive. The reason people voted for Trump was that he is not the usual politician type, however ignorance of the law is no excuse and we have to and do accept that.

Now, Joe 6 pack knows that getting dirt on a political opponent goes on in every state, and we thought albeit wrongly, that this was part of the process. We understand now that doing it on an international level makes it something more serious. We apologise to the American public, and will strive to do better as we go forward"

Something like that. It would have been a controversy for sure, but nothing like what's gone on here.

Zubeneschamali

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The only as yet unverified piece of information in the public domain is that "the meeting came to nothing" - As told to us by the two Donalds , which makes it meaningless.

There is the question of why Jnr. released emails, unprompted, proving that he was guilty as hell.

The only reason I can think of is that he agreed to take the fall because Trump Snr was in it up to his neck - knew about it in advance, approved it and maybe even dialled into it.

amandstu

everlast75 wrote: »

July 12, 2017.

Christopher Wray, then nominee's hearing...



SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Should Donald Trump Jr. have taken that meeting?

CHRISTOPHER WRAY: Well, Senator I don't – I'm hearing for the first time your description of it so I'm not really in a position to speak to it. I gather that Special Counsel Mueller —

GRAHAM: Well, let me ask you this. If I got a call from somebody saying the Russian government wants to help Lindsey Graham get reelected, they've got dirt on Lindsey Graham's opponent, should I take that meeting?

WRAY: Well, Senator I would think you'd want to consult with some good legal advisers before you did that.

GRAHAM: So, the answer is, should I call the FBI?

WRAY: I think it would be wise to let the FBI know —

GRAHAM: You're going to be the director of the FBI bell. So, here's what I want you to tell every politician. If you get a call from somebody suggesting that a foreign government wants to help you by disparaging your opponent — tell us all to call the FBI.

WRAY: To the members of this committee, any threat or effort to interfere with our elections from any nation-state, or any non-state actor, is the kind of thing the FBI would want to know.

GRAHAM: Alright, so I'll take that we should call you, and that's a great answer. You say that Mueller's a good guy, right?

WRAY: That's been my experience, yes.

GRAHAM: And you'll do anything necessary to protect him from being interfered with when it comes to doing his job?

WRAY: Absolutely, I think —

GRAHAM: Do you believe that, in light of the Don Jr. email and other allegations, that this whole thing about Trump campaign and Russia is a witch hunt? Is that a fair description of what we're all dealing with in America?

WRAY: Well, Senator I can't speak to the basis for those comments. I can tell you that my experience with Director Mueller —

GRAHAM: I'm asking you, as the future FBI director, do you consider this endeavor a witch hunt?

WRAY: I do not consider Director Mueller to be on a witch hunt.

I don't know why Graham is not asked about this every time he sticks his face in front of a camera.

Thanks, there is so much to keep abreast of. July 2017!

Leroy42

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The whole Trump Tower meeting thing is just a mess..

They've lied about everything thus far.. The only as yet unverified piece of information in the public domain is that "the meeting came to nothing" - As told to us by the two Donalds , which makes it meaningless.

The only thing that kinda,sorta adds veracity to their statement is that fact that there was no big Clinton exposé as Donald snr had promised a few days before the meeting took place.

Having said that , the reason for that could be that the Russian grown ups at the meeting told them to cop on and not make things so bloody obvious!

Or alternatively, that they did try it and found nothing of major import.

What they found might have been the same inane stuff they found on Podesta. Asking about Pizza orders and other mundane tripe. Nothing worth blowing the cover over.

You have to recall that feelings about HC were running pretty highm bo to be worthwhile, to really move the dial, it needed to be big. And maybe they didn't find anything.

People seem to be assuming that A) Trump is telling the truth about it not going anywhere (which you have pointed to) and that there was any there to go to.

Penn

Can't remember where I read it, but saw an article basically explaining that if Trump pardoned Manafort, it's an admission of guilt on behalf of Manafort, who could then be charged for state crimes (rather than federal crimes) related to tax evasion. His admission of guilt in accepting the pardons could then be used against him, plus he then wouldn't be able to plead the 5th Amendment, and he would end up in jail for those crimes rather than a federal jail. But Trump wouldn't be able to pardon him for those crimes.

I don't know how much truth is in all that, but it pretty much means Manafort is likely going to prison with or without Trump's pardons. My money is on him being found guilty in this trial and then making a deal.

Edit: Don't think this is the same article I read, but it hits the same points
https://www.vox.com/2018/6/1/17413062/trump-pardon-dsouza-manafort-mueller-cohen