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

AbusesToilets

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

No more of this please.

Bit harsh on Sharon surely

StringerBell

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Is there a cause going on about the misuse of money from the Trump charity? Haven't heard much about that with everything else going on.

The foundation is being or has been wound up over it but still gonna face charges

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/06/14/the-trump-foundation-was-one-big-scam-according-to-the-new-york-attorney-general-what-a-shock/

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/08/22/politics/michael-cohen-trump-foundation-subpoena/index.html

No idea why they didn't embed properly

MarinersBlues

Penn wrote: »

While I mostly agree, this part of what she said worries me a little:


Trump himself seems to be pushing that line of thinking regrading Cohen, that he must be making stuff up just in order to try and cut a deal for himself. It could tarnish the testimonies and evidence from those who are making plea deals in the minds of future jurors. It's clear that just testimony won't be enough. As with Manafort, Mueller's team are going to need strong evidence of the paper trails behind it all.

They can use Coehen's testimony to get warrants subpoenas etc. to present documentary evidence to the jury.
That has to be where his value is.
Any critically thinking person would have to be at least a bit suspect of the testimony from someone who cut a deal.

batgoat

MarinersBlues wrote: »

They can use Coehen's testimony to get warrants subpoenas etc. to present documentary evidence to the jury.
That has to be where his value is.
Any critically thinking person would have to be at least a bit suspect of the testimony from someone who cut a deal.

Big thing is, like with Gates is that if he lies about anything, he loses the deal. I'm guessing he needs to back everything up as well with additional evidence which I suspect he has.

Penn

MarinersBlues wrote: »

They can use Coehen's testimony to get warrants subpoenas etc. to present documentary evidence to the jury.
That has to be where his value is.
Any critically thinking person would have to be at least a bit suspect of the testimony from someone who cut a deal.

A bit suspect, absolutely. However to dismiss the testimony entirely even when that testimony is also backed up by documented evidence doesn't bode well considering there simply may not always be evidence behind what a witness is saying. To discount a witness' entire testimony purely on the basis that they made a plea deal with prosecutors due to their own involvement in those or other crimes is an extreme the jurors shouldn't go to unless they genuinely believe the testimony to be false.

Leroy42

Any witness evidence is subject to scrutiny. A person can't simply walk into a court room and claim it was Person A, without any form of backup. The prosecution would use that evidence to build a case around so that it must have been Person A. i.e, was that person at the scene, what motivation, what they had told police, any other evidence.

Trumps lawyer, is pushing this narrative that he can be caught in a perjury trap by simply telling the truth since it may be different than what Cohen etc are saying. Total BS. If Cohen says he did, and Trump says he didn't and that is all they have then Trump has nothing to worry about.

But in the same way a jury should not be, but of course are totally open to, simply ignoring the witness based on a prejudice of their intentions. What must be particularly worrying for Manafort, is that even without Gates he was convicted on 8 counts. And apparently they have even more evidence for the next trial.

Whatever about Trump policies, and I can see some benefits (or at least the chance of benefits) from some of them, and there is certainluy nothing wrong with the idea of America first or MAGA, but what is really worrying, or should be for all US citizens, is the damage that Trump is doing to the legal system.

It is still claiming Manafort, a convicted criminal is a good man, unfairly treated. Yet he has been given every advantage that every other defendent is given, the same trial, the same chance to clear his name. That Trump is clearly thinking of a pardon is shocking. The pardon was, I assume, meant to take account of considered injustice etc, not as a bail out for friends and family.

It is an area that the US really needs to reconsider

MarinersBlues

Another question is why Manafort didn't even attempt to supply a defence.

Was he sure some of the jury would hold out for him?
Is he very sure of a pardon?
Is he going to cut a deal?

What happens if he is sure of a pardon and it doesn't materialise for political reasons?

Leroy42

Just on the possibility (no, who am I kidding, the probability) of a pardon, what is the situation with regard to the next trial?

As I understand it, pardon only covers Federal, not state, and the next trial is a state trial (or maybe the other way around).

And would a pardon for the 8 give him a pardon for the remaining 10 should they seek a retrial or would that need another pardon?

I am struggling to see the advantage to Trump for going with a pardon.

Water John

Manafort dealt with some seriously dodgy people. Jail might be a safe place, if you were going to be convicted and not get off.

Penn

MarinersBlues wrote: »

What happens if he is sure of a pardon and it doesn't materialise for political reasons?

Considering his next upcoming trial, he may be waiting to see what happens with it and how many years he's looking at before deciding whether or not to flip, or whether a pardon might be incoming. I can't see him facing 10+ years in prison without doing whatever he can to get out of it, or serve less time in a prison with better facilities by cutting a deal. A near-70 year old man who did all he did and left such an extravagant lifestyle wouldn't stare down the barrel of 10+ years if he knows he has enough info to drastically reduce his sentence.

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

I am struggling to see the advantage to Trump for going with a pardon.

Just from what I've seen on Twitter, a pardon might make things even worse for Trump and Manafort, because Manafort would lose his 5th amendment right (the right to not say anything to incriminate yourself) because by accepting the pardon, he's already admitted guilt. Which means Manafort would be compelled to testify against Trump, or risk jailtime again due to obstruction or contempt of court.

But Trump even dangling the idea of a pardon could be enough to not only tell Manafort, but anyone else who hasn't already flipped, that if you keep your mouth shut, I'll help you.

Dohnjoe

Water John wrote: »

Manafort dealt with some seriously dodgy people. Jail might be a safe place, if you were going to be convicted and not get off.

The man himself is incredibly shady - check out the leak of texts from his daughters (which was confirmed)

Him and Trump were very close

amandstu

Penn wrote: »

To discount a witness' entire testimony purely on the basis that they made a plea deal with prosecutors due to their own involvement in those or other crimes is an extreme the jurors shouldn't go to unless they genuinely believe the testimony to be false.

Is it part of the judges job to make sure that the jury realizes this?

Water John

Yeah, remember those now, appalling stuff. Rot in jail, springs to mind.

In fairness, the judge seems to have been a bit peculiar in his process.

Penn

amandstu wrote: »

Is it part of the judges job to make sure that the jury realizes this?

Don't know to be honest. I imagine it'd just have to be considered the same as any witness' testimony, regardless of whether they struck a plea deal or not. After all, all witnesses are under oath and compelled to tell the truth in their testimony. It'd be more the lawyers for each side who would play up or play down the reliability of the witness and whatever deal they may have struck.

Itssoeasy

So trump thinks the "markets(financial im assuming) would crash" if he was impeached.christ even Nixon doesn't appear to have been that arrogant. So trump thinks him being impeached would precipitate a market crash ? The man is a complete narcissist.

Leroy42

Well, I think he is right, the markets would crash. Not because of him or his policies, but because markets don't like sudden changes and uncertainty.

But the markets would get over it

spacecoyote

Penn wrote: »

Just from what I've seen on Twitter, a pardon might make things even worse for Trump and Manafort, because Manafort would lose his 5th amendment right (the right to not say anything to incriminate yourself) because by accepting the pardon, he's already admitted guilt. Which means Manafort would be compelled to testify against Trump, or risk jailtime again due to obstruction or contempt of court.

But Trump even dangling the idea of a pardon could be enough to not only tell Manafort, but anyone else who hasn't already flipped, that if you keep your mouth shut, I'll help you.

Given he seems like such a slimeball, would it be probable that, even he was compelled to testify after a pardon, that he would just lie under oath...and if he did lie, what way do the legalities fall around someone who has been pardoned (could he be charged again separately if it was proved he lied under oath post-pardon)?

Christy42

Pence would announce he has I'll stay the course and end the trade wars (at the behest of Ryan most likely). Markets would be fine.

Penn

spacecoyote wrote: »

Given he seems like such a slimeball, would it be probable that, even he was compelled to testify after a pardon, that he would just lie under oath...and if he did lie, what way do the legalities fall around someone who has been pardoned (could he be charged again separately if it was proved he lied under oath post-pardon)?

If it could be proven he's lying under oath, those are new charges that could then be brought against him. His previous pardon would have no effect on that as far as I know. His pardon just means he can't plead the 5th Amendment to prevent incriminating himself (as he's already been proven guilty and accepted his guilt in accepting the pardon), which means he would have to answer the questions. If he lies and it can be proven he's lying, that's a new crime. Or not answering the questions means contempt of court.

That's my understanding of it anyway, but neither I nor Trump understand it all fully.

Penn

Christy42 wrote: »

Pence would announce he has I'll stay the course and end the trade wars (at the behest of Ryan most likely). Markets would be fine.

Isn't Ryan gone in November regardless? It's highly unlikely a full impeachment happens and is completed before November. Ryan's practically already out the door at this stage.

Leroy42

There is no way, IMO, that he will be impeached. The GOP did a lot of damage to the process with the Bill Clinton issue as it was overtly to simply try to get him for anything at all. The senate seats just are not there to get to 2/3rds in the senate.

Many will see Trump impeachment in the same light. And as has been alluded to by others, forcing Trump out via impeachment will be both a nasty affair and probably a rallying call to his base, and thus simply divide the country further.

The best course is that the DNC use this to make major gains in November, effectively boxing Trump in. No need for impeachment, just let Mueller et al continue to tighten the noose. Clearly there are serious questions for Trump Jr to answer. There are serious questions for Kushner to answer

everlast75

An interesting article here by Mr. Wittes..


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/08/the-presidents-situation-gets-worse/568135/

The most interesting paragraph of this interesting article is, in my view, the following;


"And now there’s the Cohen investigation. The most damaging thing that happened yesterday to Trump was not that his former lawyer alleged under oath that Trump had directed him in the commission of crimes. It was that the United States Department of Justice allowed him to enter a guilty plea whose factual basis was that Trump had directed him in the commission of a crime. That is to say that the significance of the Cohen plea is not merely that Cohen alleges that Trump had him arrange to pay hush money to a porn star and a model in a specific effort to influence the election with illegal corporate contributions. It’s that the Justice Department believes this allegation to be true and is willing to proceed criminally against Cohen on that basis. That’s ominous for both Trump personally and for his campaign. What’s more, this particular front in the war is not under Mueller, who spun it off to the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York. This is not, in other words, a problem Trump can fire his way out of. The SDNY has a lot more than 17 prosecutors; and whether they are angry or not, Democrats or not, they are not going away."

kilns

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So trump thinks the "markets(financial im assuming) would crash" if he was impeached.christ even Nixon doesn't appear to have been that arrogant. So trump thinks him being impeached would precipitate a market crash ? The man is a complete narcissist.

The market is due a big correction soon and if he goes they can point to that but it wont be because of him

Ironically the markets could be higher but for his trade war as he has driven some huge Chinese stocks downwards

jooksavage

everlast75 wrote: »

An interesting article here by Mr. Wittes..


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/08/the-presidents-situation-gets-worse/568135/

The most interesting paragraph of this interesting article is, in my view, the following;


"And now there’s the Cohen investigation. The most damaging thing that happened yesterday to Trump was not that his former lawyer alleged under oath that Trump had directed him in the commission of crimes. It was that the United States Department of Justice allowed him to enter a guilty plea whose factual basis was that Trump had directed him in the commission of a crime. That is to say that the significance of the Cohen plea is not merely that Cohen alleges that Trump had him arrange to pay hush money to a porn star and a model in a specific effort to influence the election with illegal corporate contributions. It’s that the Justice Department believes this allegation to be true and is willing to proceed criminally against Cohen on that basis. That’s ominous for both Trump personally and for his campaign. What’s more, this particular front in the war is not under Mueller, who spun it off to the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York. This is not, in other words, a problem Trump can fire his way out of. The SDNY has a lot more than 17 prosecutors; and whether they are angry or not, Democrats or not, they are not going away."

Great article, as usual from Wittes. I'm waiting eagerly for his Lawfare podcast on these developments. Expecting it to drop later today or early tomorrow: will definitely be worth a listen.

MadYaker

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is no way, IMO, that he will be impeached. The GOP did a lot of damage to the process with the Bill Clinton issue as it was overtly to simply try to get him for anything at all. The senate seats just are not there to get to 2/3rds in the senate.

Many will see Trump impeachment in the same light. And as has been alluded to by others, forcing Trump out via impeachment will be both a nasty affair and probably a rallying call to his base, and thus simply divide the country further.

The best course is that the DNC use this to make major gains in November, effectively boxing Trump in. No need for impeachment, just let Mueller et al continue to tighten the noose. Clearly there are serious questions for Trump Jr to answer. There are serious questions for Kushner to answer

I think this would be best. As this investigation progresses and moves closer and closer to Trump himself his supporters become even more entrenched. I think if he were impeached over campaign finance violations there would be serious trouble. Definitely protests which would draw counter protestors and could easlily turn violent and it could potentially escalate quite quickly.

However, if he or his campaign are found to have actively colluded with Russia I think that's different. It's easy for his suppoerters to swat this stuff away at the moment but if real evidence of collusion is found I think that would be a turning point for many. Sure some of his more hardcore supporters would still cry foul at impeachment but if the investigation reached that stage impeachment would have wider public support and would hopefully be less messy. Especially if the dems manage to get back control of congress this year.

Christy42

Penn wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

Pence would announce he has I'll stay the course and end the trade wars (at the behest of Ryan most likely). Markets would be fine.

Isn't Ryan gone in November regardless? It's highly unlikely a full impeachment happens and is completed before November. Ryan's practically already out the door at this stage.

Good point. Insert next cookie cutter Republican. Ryan wrote the tax bill but presumably there are similar.

jooksavage

Leroy42 wrote: »

There is no way, IMO, that he will be impeached. The GOP did a lot of damage to the process with the Bill Clinton issue as it was overtly to simply try to get him for anything at all. The senate seats just are not there to get to 2/3rds in the senate.

Many will see Trump impeachment in the same light. And as has been alluded to by others, forcing Trump out via impeachment will be both a nasty affair and probably a rallying call to his base, and thus simply divide the country further.

The best course is that the DNC use this to make major gains in November, effectively boxing Trump in. No need for impeachment, just let Mueller et al continue to tighten the noose. Clearly there are serious questions for Trump Jr to answer. There are serious questions for Kushner to answer

Completely agree, even if the Dems storm home in November, the chances of impeachment appear very unlikely at the moment. However, going by the comprehensive job Mueller has done on Manafort, it seems very unlikely that he'll let the little matter of Russian "back-channels" and tower meetings slide - indictments will drop for Don Jr. and Kushner. God only knows how Trump will respond, how many laws he'll break in plain sight. Even the most ardent Trumpists, like the Nixonians before them, have a breaking point.

Water John

That is treachery by Trump:

“If I ever got impeached, I think the market would crash. I think everybody would be very poor,” adding that Americans would see economic “numbers that you wouldn’t believe in reverse”. In characteristic ebullient style, he also doubted it will happen.


It is also a desperate attempt to not be impeached so I can only conclude that there are good grounds and he knows its coming.

Dohnjoe

Water John wrote: »

It is also a desperate attempt to not be impeached so I can only conclude that there are good grounds and he knows its coming.

I found it strange that he bought it up - it seems that his team of lawyers see it as a distinct possibility