Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

peddlelies

everlast75 wrote: »

Vote passed authorising the issuance of subpoenas for the Mueller report.

Nadler is not messing around.

Doesn't matter if he's "messing around" or not. Legally Barr doesn't have to release anything, don't be fooled by the politics.

everlast75

peddlelies wrote: »

Doesn't matter if he's "messing around" or not. Legally Barr doesn't have to release anything, don't be fooled by the politics.

I think I'll await the decision of the Courts, if it's all the same to you.

Must be the 1st time ever that a house committee had to be subpoena a report which totally exonerated the subject of that report.

peddlelies

everlast75 wrote: »

I think I'll await the decision of the Courts, if it's all the same to you.

That's fine. My understanding is that no court will order the executive branch to release grand jury material to the general public, that's before going into executive privilege and releasing damaging material on innocent people where there actions didn't amount to an indictable crime. We'll see what inevitably happens.

Must be the 1st time ever that a house committee had to be subpoena a report which totally exonerated the subject of that report.

Yah, because it doesn't happen and will amount to nothing. I don't recall the Republicans doing it after the Clinton fiasco.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

peddlelies wrote: »

That's fine. My understanding is that no court will order the executive branch to release grand jury material to the general public, that's before going into executive privilege and releasing damaging material on innocent people where there actions didn't amount to an indictable crime. We'll see what inevitably happens.

It's not Grand Jury material, it's material being subpoenaed by the Legislative Branch which is equal to the Executive. If, and only if, impeachment is proceeded with then it would be a Grand Jury issue.

The Judiciary Committee subpoena is not subject to the review of the review of the Courts unless they are holding Barr in contempt by failing to comply with the subpoena. But a Judiciary Committee subpoena is a lawful requirement to turn over the documents.

Yah, because it doesn't happen. I don't recall the Republicans doing it after the Clinton fiasco.

Starr Report was made available to Congress.

peddlelies

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

It's not Grand Jury material, it's material being subpoenaed by the Legislative Branch which is equal to the Executive. If, and only if, impeachment is proceeded with then it would be a Grand Jury issue.

The Judiciary Committee subpoena is not subject to the review of the review of the Courts unless they are holding Barr in contempt by failing to comply with the subpoena. But a Judiciary Committee subpoena is a lawful requirement to turn over the documents.


Starr Report was made available to Congress.

Alan Dershowitz said the exact opposite, legally the subpoena won't have a leg to stand on. It's not like Barr is hiding the conclusions, they've been made public already.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

peddlelies wrote: »

Alan Dershowitz said the exact opposite, legally the subpoena won't have a leg to stand on. It's not like Barr is hiding the conclusions, they've been made public already.

I'm sorry but Alan Dershowitz has never said that the Legislative and Executive branch are not equal. It's clear as day in the Constitution and anyone peddling that is spewing falsehoods and propaganda.

What Dershowitz may have said is that Executive Privilege can be claimed, but we have a mountain of precedent since US v Nixon which prefers Congress in that fight.

peddlelies

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

I'm sorry but Alan Dershowitz has never said that the Legislative and Executive branch are not equal. It's clear as day in the Constitution and anyone peddling that is spewing falsehoods and propaganda.

What Dershowitz may have said is that Executive Privilege can be claimed, but we have a mountain of precedent since US v Nixon which prefers Congress in that fight.

Here's a partial snippet of what he's been saying because clearly I'm no expert in legal jargon. He's basically claiming that it's a political issue not a legal one since the findings of the report came up with no additional indictments.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/dershowitz-no-legal-basis-requiring-barr-to-release-mueller-report

Igotadose

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

I'm sorry but Alan Dershowitz has never said that the Legislative and Executive branch are not equal. It's clear as day in the Constitution and anyone peddling that is spewing falsehoods and propaganda.

What Dershowitz may have said is that Executive Privilege can be claimed, but we have a mountain of precedent since US v Nixon which prefers Congress in that fight.

Not that clear here, actually. Fast and Furious had congress subpoenaing the AG, who refused, was taken to court, and after years, settled. So, the same may very well happen with the Mueller report - we may actually never see any of it. Nice, eh?

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/democrats-threaten-to-subpoena-full-mueller-report-but-that-likely-wont-succeed/

peddlelies

This time article talks about the legal stuff concerning the AG and SC releasing reports and what changed in 1999

http://time.com/5558083/mueller-report-release-starr/

"...It happened that the 1978 statute expired in 1999, just a year after the impeachment — and so it followed that the procedures for a special prosecution were changed accordingly. In place of the old statute, the Department of Justice enacted internal regulations for a Special Counsel’s work. Those regulations included giving the Attorney General more power to decide how much of the final report of the investigation would be released to the public, if anything. The section regarding the release of the Special Counsel report says, “At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.” Another section says the Attorney General “may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.”

..

"Not included was a statute requiring Special Counsel investigations to be disclosed to Congress or the public."

1eg0a3xv7b82of

Trump is really getting results
You only get results like this from people who deal in complex business and corporate deals.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nato-chief-in-speech-to-congress-declares-trumps-push-for-more-defense-spending-is-working

MadYaker

More money for the military industrial complex is never a good thing.

JRant

everlast75 wrote: »

Vote passed authorising the issuance of subpoenas for the Mueller report.

Nadler is not messing around.

It's the very definition of messing around I'm afraid. He's issuing subpoenas like confetti, even for people who are already cooperating.

I would have preferred if he waited until the report was released in a week or two, review it and then see if subpoenas are required. It gives off a very petty vibe unfortunately.

duploelabs

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Trump is really getting results
You only get results like this from people who deal in complex business and corporate deals.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nato-chief-in-speech-to-congress-declares-trumps-push-for-more-defense-spending-is-working

Still waiting on your response from mine, and many other posters questions

Midlife

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Trump is really getting results
You only get results like this from people who deal in complex business and corporate deals.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nato-chief-in-speech-to-congress-declares-trumps-push-for-more-defense-spending-is-working

Ha ha.

You think Trump deals in anything complex?

He's a good salesman and good at asserting pressure when he has it to assert.

But you're overlooking the massive legslative failure he's had by doing nothing he planned to do with both houses. That was complex. He failed.

everlast75

JRant wrote: »

It's the very definition of messing around I'm afraid. He's issuing subpoenas like confetti, even for people who are already cooperating.

I would have preferred if he waited until the report was released in a week or two, review it and then see if subpoenas are required. It gives off a very petty vibe unfortunately.

Depends on your perspective.

Imho, Barr has been messing around, giving talking points to a president he auditioned to, laughing at questions on releasing the report when not avoiding them at all. Nadler wrote to him and asked him to work with them and he didn't.

It might be a long fight getting the report. Best start soon

1eg0a3xv7b82of

duploelabs wrote: »

Where Tax avoidance isn't illegal, Trumps method of employing that tactic by conflating and inflating his net worth on financial statements as detailed in court documents is fraud, and is illegal.

Do you think that's also great and something you'd professionally advocate?

Where is your proof he has committed tax fraud?
People sometimes confuse tax avoidance and tax evasion
Have read of the link below which gives a very basic but insightful description of tax avoidance and tax planning


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/10/opinion/gabriel-zucman-paradise-papers-tax-evasion.html

duploelabs

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Where is your proof he has committed tax fraud?
People sometimes confuse tax avoidance and tax evasion
Have read of the link below which gives a very basic but insightful description of tax avoidance and tax planning


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/10/opinion/gabriel-zucman-paradise-papers-tax-evasion.html

He inflated his assets value
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/28/politics/cohen-trump-wealth-inflation/index.html

JRant

everlast75 wrote: »

Depends on your perspective.

Imho, Barr has been messing around, giving talking points to a president he auditioned to, laughing at questions on releasing the report when not avoiding them at all. Nadler wrote to him and asked him to work with them and he didn't.

It might be a long fight getting the report. Best start soon

I could be wrong but didn't Nadler set a deadline of yesterday and Barr said he was working with the SC and would have it mid-April at the lastest.

Haven't seen Barr laughing at questions on the report so can't comment on that.

The report will be delivered to Congress, it's going to boil down to the redactions and handover of supporting documentation.

Midlife

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Where is your proof he has committed tax fraud?
People sometimes confuse tax avoidance and tax evasion
Have read of the link below which gives a very basic but insightful description of tax avoidance and tax planning


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/10/opinion/gabriel-zucman-paradise-papers-tax-evasion.html

So you condone tax avoidance?

It's hilarious. Companies like Amazon pay no taxes, a billionaire tax avoider gets elected president and people line up to blame poor people and immigrants for the inequality.

1eg0a3xv7b82of

duploelabs wrote: »

He inflated his assets value
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/28/politics/cohen-trump-wealth-inflation/index.html

I have read that link and see no issues for tump there. Property Appraisals are not a science and Some companies will use property appraisers to increase and decrease value as it suits
But proving intent and fraud is very hard.

marno21

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1113583441881325568

There was no word at all from Mueller's team during the investigation but now all of a sudden the ship is leaking.

everlast75

marno21 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1113583441881325568

There was no word at all from Mueller's team during the investigation but now all of a sudden the ship is leaking.

A few of the team have left.

We are told by Trump et al the investigation is over.

And it's almost like they worry that the report, which may have been intended for Congress, was not going to see the light of day.

More good news;


https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/1113569860091633664?s=19


And for Trump supporters, I believe *all* candidates should show their tax returns.

If any application for the intelligence agencies require a deep dive into your finances, so as to ensure you are not open to financial influence, there's no reason why a president should be any different IMHO

duploelabs

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

I have read that link and see no issues for tump there. Property Appraisals are not a science and Some companies will use property appraisers to increase and decrease value as it suits
But proving intent and fraud is very hard.

Proving fraud is hard?! He submitted financial statements that were false, that's fraud

1eg0a3xv7b82of

duploelabs wrote: »

Proving fraud is hard?! He submitted financial statements that were false, that's fraud

Are u basing your post on what Cohen claimed he did
Or have you proof that he committed fraud
Can you give me a link please

batgoat

Karsyn Tender Rifle wrote: »

Are u basing your post on what Cohen claimed he did
Or have you proof that he committed fraud
Can you give me a link please

We have a history of dodgy dealings plus his charity was shut down for misuse of funds... So there's a lot of signs of potential fraud..

Leroy42

batgoat wrote: »

We have a history of dodgy dealings plus his charity was shut down for misuse of funds... So there's a lot of signs of potential fraud..

Ah yes, but potential is not enough. Trump supporters will only ask questions if and when full and direct proof is provided. Suspicion is not enough.

Unless...

Unless of course it is something to do with HC, or Obama. Or anyone they don't particularly like. Then it is perfectly fine to take the line that if suspicions exist then it right and proper, and indeed necessary for democracy, that these issues are investigated.

Unless its Trump.

mcmoustache

marno21 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1113583441881325568

There was no word at all from Mueller's team during the investigation but now all of a sudden the ship is leaking.

Who could have guessed that Trump's AG would misrepresent the conclusions of the report? Just like the North Korea debacle, it looks like the victory lap last week by Trump's supporters may have been a bit premature. Not that it matters. His supporters have a knack for going through the cycle of repeating a Trump lie, the lie getting exposed and then moving on to the next lie as if the previous one never happened.

Leroy42

There was a discussion on CNN last night given Trump latest crazy speeches where he got where his father was born wrong and then in a later speech starting simply making up claims about windmills and cancer and other nonsense.

Anyway, the point being that these lies actually work in Trumps favour as the media spend time trying to work out the truth, then tryign to get the WH to explain why the lie happened and what he really meant.

All the while, just like during his election, he avoids having to actually say anything of detail.

The conversation is spent about what he said, what he meant, was it a lie or a misstatement. But the real question, say in relation to his dad, how the hell can a POTUS get something so fundamental so wrong? Does he do this often? How do those working with him know if he knows what he actually taking about.

The same for windmills. Does he really believe that windmill noise causes cancer? Is he going to legislate to stop windmill manufacturers killing people like that? What regulations will he bring in? Should those people forced to leave near windmills be compensated for this?

If windmills are not the answer to clean energy, what does Trump propose in it stead?

But as you said, none of that happens. We get a few posts or TV segments asking about it and then the cycle starts all over again the next day and nothing is ever actually achieved. The one thing Trump does spectacularly well, if avoid having to take a position on anything. He is everything to everyone.

everlast75

I and others have said here before, those kind of SNAFUs by the President should be relegated to the end of the news programme, under the heading of

"and finally tonight, more nonsense from "The Stable Genius". Today, our President lied about where his father was born, for some reason, said Windmills cause cancer, said he was going to close the border, then said he wouldn't, said he would repeal Obamacare, and then said he wouldn't.

As ever, we will keep relegating these pieces of nonsense to the end of the programme, and focus substantively instead on the actions taken by the President and his administration"

That's how to handle the distractions. Keep shining a light on what they are doing, and not the proverbial set of car keys they are jingling in the other hand.

B0jangles

The problem is that people keep pointing at Trump when he is saying something incredibly, undeniably insane/untrue and saying "look LOOK at this lunatic!" and expecting Trump supporters to say "ok yeah, you're right he's nuts."

They aren't going to to that.

Pretty much anyone who still supports Trump at this point knows that he is a basketcase. They approve of it and at some level they enjoy watching people being horrified at whatever piece of insanity comes out of his mouth.