Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Penn

RIGOLO wrote: »

Another potential 'process crime' as the say in legal circles.
Still no inkling of any Russian collusion by Trump , wasnt that what the left were hoping to impeach him on.

6 million for a dossier, the might of FB and Google behind you, a DOJ thats riddled with supporters and deep state fifth column elements supporting you, 24x7 main stream media support and still the best they can come up with is some process crimes against a former admin official.

No wonder it got lost it the news cycle, its a nothing story.

Nothing about the Zinke story has anything to do with the Russia investigation. Are you trying to casually link the two to purposefully cause obfuscation?

If Zinke lied under oath to federal prosecutors, he should be investigated for such. That's not a nothing story.

RIGOLO

Leroy42 wrote: »

Right, so you were joking, fair enough. So have you any actual examples, save for Towers built 30 years ago and your own version of a joke to point to his planning.

Remember that people have put forward many examples of his lack of planning which you want to disagree with. So go on.

Heres a good example of planning...

June 16 2015 - At TRUMP tower a 52 storey 200 metre sky scraper he built , Donald Trump announces his formal campaign to run for the Republican nomination and ergo the 2016 US Presidential election.

Nov 8 2016 - Donal Trump wins the 2016 US Presidential Election

Jan 20th 2017 - Donald Trump is sworn in as the 45th President of The United States.

and people claim he cant plan.

Plans dont get much bigger than trying to be the 45th President of the United States.

Stallingrad

RIGOLO wrote: »

Plans dont get much bigger than trying to be the 45th President of the United States.

There are those that day it was nothing more than PR stunt, nobody has ever looked more surprised or disappointed to get the job.

duploelabs

Penn wrote: »

Nothing about the Zinke story has anything to do with the Russia investigation. Are you trying to casually link the two to purposefully cause obfuscation?

If Zinke lied under oath to federal prosecutors, he should be investigated for such. That's not a nothing story.

Also see the refusal to use the term Conspiracy rather than collusion, the latter isn't in the terms of the investigation nor is it a crime

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

Another potential 'process crime' as the say in legal circles.
the best they can come up with is some process crimes against a former admin official.

No wonder it got lost it the news cycle, its a nothing story.

Probably not for Ryan Zinke. He did, after all, resign from the administration (maybe fired, whatever, he's gone). And... is a 'process crime' any less bad than some 'non-process crime?'

Really it's a non-story because of the constant stream of crimes coming out of this administration. 18 current investigations and counting. Over 90 indictments.

This doesn't include other crimes for which his company, family and defunct foundation are being investigate for (or, in the case of the foundation, closed due to malfeasance)

6 guilty pleas and 1 conviction - Manafort.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/trump-administration-conflicts/

https://www.axios.com/tracking-russia-investigation-mueller-trump-718bc918-984b-4df1-b1a0-5dafff0347b3.html

It really is hard to keep up with it. Sad that Americans have to spend so much energy on this, but the last couple administrations weren't crime-ridden swamps like this one.

UsedToWait

everlast75 wrote: »

Spike Lee said:

“The 2020 presidential election is around the corner. Let’s all mobilize, let’s all be on the right side of history, let’s choose love over hate, let’s do the right thing.”

Trump replied with


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1100000030319169537


Notice Lee actually said nothing about Trump - yet Trump interpreted it as an attack on him. Why is that I wonder...

Clearly, it was a plea to mobilise and vote against Trump for 2020, but can anyone see any hint of a 'racist hit'?

Trump gives so much of himself away when he castigates other people.

Leroy42

This is your original post

RIGOLO wrote: »

What Report ?

The only person who will get to see the Mueller Report is the AG, as in the newly appointed Trump AG Barr.
He then produces a report of the report for Congress.
So people will only get to see a report of a report .

This aint the Starr investigation, big difference between an IC and an SC investigation.
That must suck, 2 years waiting for a report and then realising you aint even going to get to see it.

When it comes to long term politicising , 9 times out of 10 the GOP will always pull a master stroke.

To which I replied:

Leroy42 wrote: »

Schiff was out on the TV circuit at the weekend saying that they (DNC) will push for full disclosure and will request Mueller give evidence if it is not done.

But on a different point, why would you not want the report published? If it clears your guy then great, and if it raises questions then surely it is better that they are out in the open?

And what possible basis would you think that burying a report into the workings of politics is a good idea?

But you never bothered to come back and answer that so I raised the point again:

Leroy42 wrote: »

So Rigolo, any answer to why you think it a good idea that federal investigation reports should be buried.

RIGOLO wrote: »

If you can find where I said that, I might have an answer.

but once again theres no need for me to answer a question about something I didnt say.

We been down this road before,
For future reference im just going to ignore questions about things you claim I said but I didnt.

Here is your posts. I asked you after the first post why you thought it was good that a federal investigation report would not be published. I then had to ask you again when you had left enough time to feign disgust that I was making things up that you never said.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but you seemed to be happy enough that the report would not see the light of day. Did I read that wrong?

But if you don't want to be misunderstood maybe try posting what you actually mean rather than posting some opaque stuff.

Perhaps it was another of your jokey type posts?

So to avoid any further misunderstanding on my part, perhaps you could explain your position in whether the report from Mueller should be published for all (with possible redactions)?

aloyisious

RIGOLO wrote: »

Im not sure how much mortar he mixed personally, but it does have his name on it.

Not a bad achievement for a man who some people say 'he doesnt plan '

Id imagine theres ALOT of planning goes into getting a 52 storey skyscraper erected on 5th Avenue.

Proposing the idea that Don was the planner might be stretching his intellect too far. I'd have said that it was more that he looked at the idea of a Trump building in his home town, got architects to draw up the skyscraper plans and approved them when the costs were to his liking, and that would have been the extent of his involvement, unless he has an NY architecture licence. There's nothing wrong with the notion that he can come up with a idea and get staff to put bones on it so HE can claim credit for it, in the same way that he's claimed credit for happenings that were initiated before he stood for GOP candidature.

Leroy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

Right, so you were joking, fair enough. So have you any actual examples, save for Towers built 30 years ago and your own version of a joke to point to his planning.

Remember that people have put forward many examples of his lack of planning which you want to disagree with. So go on.

Heres a good example of planning...

June 16 2015 - At TRUMP tower a 52 storey 200 metre sky scraper he built , Donald Trump announces his formal campaign to run for the Republican nomination and ergo the 2016 US Presidential election.

Nov 8 2016 - Donal Trump wins the 2016 US Presidential Election

Jan 20th 2017 - Donald Trump is sworn in as the 45th President of The United States.

and people claim he cant plan.

Plans dont get much bigger than trying to be the 45th President of the United States.

And again I ask you. If you are so certain that Trump was so deeply involved in these projects do you then agree that he must have been very aware of the plans for Trump Tower Moscow.

That he, as you state can take credit for getting elected, must therefore have known what his election team were up to. Namely Flynn and Papadopoulos, not to mention Cohen.

That such a man would have been very involved in planning for dealing with Stormy Daniel's?

RIGOLO

RIGOLO wrote: »

Another potential 'process crime' as the say in legal circles.
Still no inkling of any Russian collusion by Trump , wasnt that what the left were hoping to impeach him on.

6 million for a dossier, the might of FB and Google behind you, a DOJ thats riddled with supporters and deep state fifth column elements supporting you, 24x7 main stream media support and still the best they can come up with is some process crimes against a former admin official.

No wonder it got lost it the news cycle, its a nothing story.

Process crime yes, but a crime nonetheless. Yet another criminal in Trump's administration. There seems to be a trend towards criminality from Trump's "best people" or the grown ups as I remember you calling them a few months ago. Doesn't that concern you? If politicians here were this brazenly crooked there'd be uproar. At least I hope there would.

phater phagan

Apparently sex traffickers as well as, in Trump's mind, coming in droves across the border from Mexico, are also being done by some of his close friends and supporters, Kraft, Epstein et al. In addition to that, his secretary of Labour,Alex Acosta facilitated Epstein by letting him off the hook after you abused young girls - giving him immunity from federal charges,

phater phagan

Sorry it should read " after HE abused young girls",

aloyisious

A bit of a surprise tonight with Don announcing a summit to sign a trade deal with China after yesterdays scrapping extra tariffs on China. I don't know who he has talking to China to pull this rabbit out of a hat. I'm looking at the coincidence of Kim visiting China while en-route to Vietnam with Don on the way there as well for their meeting.

prawnsambo

aloyisious wrote: »

A bit of a surprise tonight with Don announcing a summit to sign a trade deal with China after yesterdays scrapping extra tariffs on China. I don't know who he has talking to China to pull this rabbit out of a hat. I'm looking at the coincidence of Kim visiting China while en-route to Vietnam with Don on the way there as well for their meeting.

I think it's a memorandum of understanding, not a trade deal. Or maybe it's actually a trade deal that they're not calling a memorandum of understanding. Or something.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

RIGOLO wrote: »

Another potential 'process crime' as the say in legal circles.
Still no inkling of any Russian collusion by Trump , wasnt that what the left were hoping to impeach him on.

Uh... process crimes include perjury and obstruction of justice, so just because something is a process crime doesn't necessitate that it isn't part of "collusion". In fact, it means they potentially lied to cover up collusion.

jochenstacker

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Uh... process crimes include perjury and obstruction of justice, so just because something is a process crime doesn't necessitate that it isn't part of "collusion". In fact, it means they potentially lied to cover up collusion.

The only possible crime Trump supporters will accept, is Trump handing Putin brown envelopes in a back alley behind a dumpster.
If there's video. And witnesses. And it has to specifically say "BRIBE" on the envelope in big, red, all caps letters.
And then they might claim he's only paying him back because he might have forgotten his wallet at home and Putin spotted him a few bucks to pay for a few drinks they had together (NO COLLUSION!!!), so it's all harmless really.
The fact that the entire Trump administration is rotten to the core with real, actual criminals is entirely irrelevant.
Trump himself is a pure as the driven snow.
Of course this begs the question if Trump is an appalling judge of character.

pixelburp

The Zinke investigation doesn't even have anything to do with Russia, it's a Federal investigation over perjury for goodness sake yet as you say, it's not 'crime enough' anymore to have (to be fair, potentially) corrupt (ex)officials from the administration.

It's one thing to be partisan; that's fine, and if we're honest we're all probably a little guilty of our thinking leaning into some form of bias. It's quite another to be so nakedly, brazenly partisan that you just dismiss any and all obvious impropriety within this administration. Or indeed try and conflate it as something to do with the Mueller investigation, which it is & frankly an intellectually bogus point of view.

This administration is proving itself to be a clutch of grifters and what we'd call Cute Hoors over here. At least America has the systems to prosecute this carry on when it happens I suppose which is something. Even a cursory Google reveals scandals at worst and ethics violations at 'best' across a lot of the administrations. It's just kinda embarrassing at this stage.

qwerty ui op

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think it's a memorandum of understanding, not a trade deal. Or maybe it's actually a trade deal that they're not calling a memorandum of understanding.

All those reporters know exactly what the terms mean they wouldn't be in the room if they didn't, when Lighthizer half turns around he's not explaining MOU's to the room, he's stopping Trump making fool of himself and explaining it to Trump, it's to no avail because Trump is thinking, i'll sound intelligent to the public here and goes against the word of a frecking Trade chief. When Lighthizer claps he's hands together it's so obvious he views Trump as a child.

Igotadose

qwerty ui op wrote: »

All those reporters know exactly what the terms mean they wouldn't be in the room if they didn't, when Lighthizer half turns around he's not explaining MOU's to the room, he's stopping Trump making fool of himself and explaining it to Trump, it's to no avail because Trump is thinking, i'll sound intelligent to the public here and goes against the word of a frecking Trade chief. When Lighthizer claps he's hands together it's so obvious he views Trump as a child.

Pretty much an example of an unplanned meeting, when the guy in charge is caught up arguing with his chief representative in the meeting. Didn't they meet beforehand to discuss? What, didn't plan the time to do so?

In other Trump news, he's apparently lying on twitter :eek: about something Ivanka and some job committee something that actually doesn't create jobs but something pledges something something.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/25/politics/fact-check-ivanka-trump-create-millions-of-jobs/index.html

Leroy42

qwerty ui op wrote: »

All those reporters know exactly what the terms mean they wouldn't be in the room if they didn't, when Lighthizer half turns around he's not explaining MOU's to the room, he's stopping Trump making fool of himself and explaining it to Trump, it's to no avail because Trump is thinking, i'll sound intelligent to the public here and goes against the word of a frecking Trade chief. When Lighthizer claps he's hands together it's so obvious he views Trump as a child.

I think it is more than that. Remember that he signed a MOU in regards to Trump Tower Moscow, so to have that guy say it was the same as a contract is a problem as he has taken the position that MOU meant nothing and he hardly even knew about it.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

jochenstacker wrote: »

The only possible crime Trump supporters will accept, is Trump handing Putin brown envelopes in a back alley behind a dumpster.
If there's video. And witnesses. And it has to specifically say "BRIBE" on the envelope in big, red, all caps letters.
And then they might claim he's only paying him back because he might have forgotten his wallet at home and Putin spotted him a few bucks to pay for a few drinks they had together (NO COLLUSION!!!), so it's all harmless really.
The fact that the entire Trump administration is rotten to the core with real, actual criminals is entirely irrelevant.
Trump himself is a pure as the driven snow.
Of course this begs the question if Trump is an appalling judge of character.

The problem is that there is technically no literal federal crime of "collusion" - so Trump and Co. could be brought up on conspiracy (which is a type of "collusion" by definition) and the Trump supporters will be like "CONSPIRACY! TOLD YOU, NO COLLUSION"

I think it'd be worse if it was making false statements and/or campaign finance law violations - both of which could be considered collusion based on the evidence - because they (to the simpler mind) don't sound as "bad"

RIGOLO

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Uh... process crimes include perjury and obstruction of justice, so just because something is a process crime doesn't necessitate that it isn't part of "collusion". In fact, it means they potentially lied to cover up collusion.

potentially wont get anyone convicted in a court of law , not to mind getting an impeachment resolution passed , not to mind actually making an impeachment stick .

The more process crimes and pre-Trump issues that people are being hauled up on the more obvious it is Mueller has nothing on Russian Collusion by TRUMP.
Mueller is just shaking the tree and doing the old KGB dance, bring me the man and i will find you the crime .

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

RIGOLO wrote: »

potentially wont get anyone convicted in a court of law , not to mind getting an impeachment resolution passed , not to mind actually making an impeachment stick .

Theory confirmed. Trump supporters will only support impeachment for the non-existent crime of collusion and don't genuinely care about actual crimes against the United States that may have been committed.

"Potentially" is how the judicial system works btw; it's innocent until proven guilty.

The more process crimes and pre-Trump issues that people are being hauled up on the more obvious it is Mueller has nothing on Russian Collusion by TRUMP.
Mueller is just shaking the tree and doing the old KGB dance, bring me the man and i will find you the crime .

Are you suggesting that the President of the US should not be impeached for the process crimes of perjury or obstruction of justice?

By definition a process crime is committed (usually) to cover something else up; so the more process crimes there are, the more evidence there is for a crime that would be defined as "collusion".

jochenstacker

RIGOLO wrote: »

potentially wont get anyone convicted in a court of law , not to mind getting an impeachment resolution passed , not to mind actually making an impeachment stick .

The more process crimes and pre-Trump issues that people are being hauled up on the more obvious it is Mueller has nothing on Russian Collusion by TRUMP.
Mueller is just shaking the tree and doing the old KGB dance, bring me the man and i will find you the crime .

This is just white noise at this stage.

Leroy42

RIGOLO wrote: »

potentially wont get anyone convicted in a court of law , not to mind getting an impeachment resolution passed , not to mind actually making an impeachment stick .

The more process crimes and pre-Trump issues that people are being hauled up on the more obvious it is Mueller has nothing on Russian Collusion by TRUMP.
Mueller is just shaking the tree and doing the old KGB dance, bring me the man and i will find you the crime .

But you are happy that he is at least finding out these crimes? It would be terrible if these people were simply let get away with what they have done.

If that means that Trump has to put up with some questions, for the betterment of US (MAGA) surely Trump should be happy to pay that small price.

I fail to see why anyone would be against people getting caught for there crimes.

Of course it is disingenuous to claim it akin to some made up impression you have of the KGB. Mueller's investigation was initiated by the Senate, based on credible questions raised. I don't see why you are so against a constitutionally created investigation, run by one of the most respected investigators and public servants (not to mention a life long GOP member).

RIGOLO

aloyisious wrote: »

Proposing the idea that Don was the planner might be stretching his intellect too far. I'd have said that it was more that he looked at the idea of a Trump building in his home town, got architects to draw up the skyscraper plans and approved them when the costs were to his liking, and that would have been the extent of his involvement, unless he has an NY architecture licence. There's nothing wrong with the notion that he can come up with a idea and get staff to put bones on it so HE can claim credit for it, in the same way that he's claimed credit for happenings that were initiated before he stood for GOP candidature.

theres been various response on this ..

First the anti-Trump posters postulate because Trump didnt build the 52 Storey 200 metre skyscraper with his own hands , he didnt 'build it' .

Then theres a comment yaeh well it was over 30 years ago.

Now we have the claim because he didnt do the actual architectural drawings , hes not the planner .

Followed with a one liner claiming basically that his involvement was minimal .
So Carnegie Hall, Seagrams Bldg, Woolworths tower, Rockerfeller plaza , the list goes on, all had nothing todo with the ability of the person they are named after and basically, it was just an idea and they got someone else to do it so really they had little invovlement.

The anti-Trumpers are trying to make it sound likes its easier to get a 52 storey 200 metre skyscraper erected on 5th avenue than getting a septic tank approved for the back garden and anyone could do it. And all this in 70s NY in an area that was not in anyways affluent.

The bias runs deep. Cant even acknowledge that getting a Tower built in NY requires some form of planning and acumen.

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

potentially wont get anyone convicted in a court of law , not to mind getting an impeachment resolution passed , not to mind actually making an impeachment stick .

The more process crimes and pre-Trump issues that people are being hauled up on the more obvious it is Mueller has nothing on Russian Collusion by TRUMP.
Mueller is just shaking the tree and doing the old KGB dance, bring me the man and i will find you the crime .

Oh, please. Clinton got hauled up on impeachment due to a 'process crime' of lying to the investigator (Starr.) And unless you're a lawyer, I doubt you know what a process crime really is and how they're defined, other than 'university of google.' Let the legal system do its work imo. Process crime is in the news due to that cretin Roger Stone blathering about it. Like the jail food's different if you are in for a 'process crime' versus a felony. Crime's crime the sentence will be the measure of the severity.

In other news, it's articles like this one that really annoy me. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democrats-corruption-2020-primary_n_5c742cf1e4b0f09f144f1241

The author is all over how 2020 is going to be a slam dunk for the Democrats. Wrong. The problems that the Trump campaign blundered into messaging about, haven't gone away - the midwest still is doing poorly, opioids are still a problem and great bodies of the electorate are disenfranchised. If you're not involved in the stock market, you might have a 'gig economy' job now, but that's not a good job. You don't have decent medical care. None of this will change in the next 2 years.

Further, Trump's spending lavishly on his 'digital machine' and has the advantage of knowing he'll be the nominee and won't be subject to infighting, at least, not right now. The democrats are going to waste lots of money and time attacking each other, egged on by Trump through the whole process, either directly by him taunting via twitter, or more heinous policies that'll get the Democrats excited. His recent blathering about abortion and new attempts to reduce abortion access at the federal level through funding changes, are actually bait for the Democrats to fight over imo.

They can't take a high road with Trump - that didn't work. They do need to fight him but there are way too many Democratic candidates now, all to Trump's advantage

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

The Trump Tower thing is a silly conversation - the Trump Organisation purchased the site, raised the money and hired the architects and builders. The Trump Organisation in any rational meaning of the word "built" Trump Tower.

Is it a hideously ugly building? Yes.
Did he fail to pay a bunch of staff? Yes.
Did he breach planning? Yes.

But it's ridiculous to claim he didn't "build" it because he wasn't out shovelling muck and pouring concrete.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

But you are happy that he is at least finding out these crimes? It would be terrible if these people were simply let get away with what they have done.

If that means that Trump has to put up with some questions, for the betterment of US (MAGA) surely Trump should be happy to pay that small price.

I fail to see why anyone would be against people getting caught for there crimes.

Of course it is disingenuous to claim it akin to some made up impression you have of the KGB. Mueller's investigation was initiated by the Senate, based on credible questions raised. I don't see why you are so against a constitutionally created investigation, run by one of the most respected investigators and public servants (not to mention a life long GOP member).

Or to put it another way

When Republicans commit crimes, the response is
1) they are process crimes
2) done in a previous lifetime (see Donny Jr)
3) The Dems would do it if they could
4) Its a witch hunt

When a Democrat doesn't commit a crime (see Hillary Clinton), the response is "LOCK HER UP!"

It is hypocrisy 101 and its a sad indictment of his supporters that no one can come on here and stay on topic to defend his actions. Its always obfuscation and distraction techniques.

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

Or to put it another way

When Republicans commit crimes, the response is
1) they are process crimes
2) done in a previous lifetime (see Donny Jr)
3) The Dems would do it if they could
4) Its a witch hunt

When a Democrat doesn't commit a crime (see Hillary Clinton), the response is "LOCK HER UP!"

It is hypocrisy 101 and its a sad indictment of his supporters that no one can come on here and stay on topic to defend his actions. Its always obfuscation and distraction techniques.

Not really.

Theres no need to obfuscate, it seems Mueller is more than capable of obfuscating himself, he set out to find Russian collusion by Trump, him and the main stream media and a bunch of insiders in the DOJ.

And so far they havent laid a finger on Trump but they have managed to take down a few of their own in the cross fire and blowback. Its brought obfuscation to a whole new level.

And today we enter day 767 of his Presidency. Who needs distraction techniques .

BTW theres 696 days to go for term 1 , maybe Mueller better get his skates on and get that report to Trumps AG , Bill Barrs desk.
Im sure Bill Barr will know what to do with it, he probably learned a few things when he was AG under Bush I in the early 90s.