Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Akrasia

everlast75 wrote: »

over a year ago, I floated the idea that the mundane events of Trump's days, along with his tweets, should be demoted to the end of any news cycle. A kind of

"And finally today, President Trump ordered 300 plus burgers for an athletic team, lied that he paid for them out of his own pocket, then told another reporter he ordered 1000 burgers, and in his tweet referring to it, misspelled the word "hamburger".

That's all folks, have a good evening

All of the other time should be spent focusing in on his parties actions.

Fake news.

They've been spelt Hamberders in the dictionary since the beginning of time. I called the dictionary guy who told me that, true story.

Igotadose

Judge blocks TrumpCo's attempt to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-census-citizenship-question_us_5c1c1a19e4b05c88b6f68c25

The best line in this, imo, is the one from the Trump Admin who, when confronted with evidence that this would suppress the responses, said that
"Even if fewer people initially chose to respond to the survey voluntarily, the Census Bureau had robust plans to follow up with people, officials said."

I can just imagine... "<ding dong> Sir, you failed to respond to the 2020 Census. I'm here to take your census. How many live here? How long? Are you a citizen?" and then off to ICE with new non-citizen information gathered in person. Uhuh.

FreudianSlippers

He'd probably cut out the middle-man and just get ICE to manually take the census.

mcmoustache

Duck Soup wrote: »

Barr looks bored off his tits and we're only halfway through Feinstein's opening statement.

He seems very sane. Graham's opening nonsense, on the other hand, was presumably for an audience of one (Individual 1). I'll watch later but it appears that Barr is competent and has provided decent reassurances.

Professor Moriarty

mcmoustache wrote: »

He seems very sane. Graham's opening nonsense, on the other hand, was presumably for an audience of one (Individual 1). I'll watch later but it appears that Barr is competent and has provided decent reassurances.

If that's the case, I'll give him six months before The Donald fires him with a tweet.

Manic Moran

seamus wrote: »

I too would dispute this idea that corruption in the US is low. Legal corruption in the US is enormous, kickbacks at the executive level in top companies, campaign funding methods that skirt around the law, exclusivity deals between all sorts of parties where it should never exist - like between pharma companies and hospitals.

I didn't say there was no corruption, I said that's what the processes were for. That's different from saying that it works well.

The military equipment procurement process is the most infamous, usually because it has the biggest dollar values attached combined with the most jobs in the home state of whatever legislator wins. Nearly three years ago, the head of the Army said with reference to the new military pistol selection process...

"We're not figuring out the next lunar landing. This is a pistol. Two years to test? At $17 million?" Milley said to an audience at a Washington, D.C., think tank on March 10. "You give me $17 million on a credit card, and I'll call Cabela's (Sporting goods store)tonight, and I'll outfit every soldier, sailor, airman and Marine with a pistol for $17 million. And I'll get a discount on a bulk buy."

At the time, it was considered somewhat hyperbolic, as $17m to test and select a pistol would only actually get some 34,000 of them if he just made a judgement call. But his point was well taken, the system is highly inefficient.

The irony is that last year a new report came out, after the complete process was finished and the pistol contract awarded.... Saying that it actually might have been cheaper to just send someone to the local sporting goods store with a credit card.
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/06/28/cabelas-might-have-been-a-cheaper-option-for-the-militarys-newest-handgun-after-all-report-shows/

everlast75

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

and finish off with this slightly amended pic

Explicit proof that you cannot buy class...

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Our processes to ensure complete fairness, lack of corruption and best value from the final bid are so ridiculous that we're better off accepting some limited corruption or best effort decision making to make things cheaper.

Manic Moran wrote: »

I didn't say there was no corruption, I said that's what the processes were for. That's different from saying that it works well.

So hold on, your argument is that there should simply be more efficient corruption!

Well, I guess then Trump is exactly what the US is looking for after all.

everlast75

mcmoustache wrote: »

He seems very sane. Graham's opening nonsense, on the other hand, was presumably for an audience of one (Individual 1). I'll watch later but it appears that Barr is competent and has provided decent reassurances.

My reading is that he is not a bad nomination at all.

The only real fly in the ointment is his comment about Mueller's investigation. Given that criticism is most likely the only reason Trump picked him, there are legitimate concerns that he would try to interfere.

If the Dems do as good a job at this nomination hearing as they did of William Saxbe (Maddow did a great programme on it last night), Nixon's his 4th AG, then there will be no real issue.

listermint

Leroy42 wrote: »

So hold on, your argument is that there should simply be more efficient corruption!

Well, I guess then Trump is exactly what the US is looking for after all.

its the libertarian market where anything goes and kickbacks are the king of the day that is the problem.

Libertarians fail to raise that as a problem as a anything goes system

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

So hold on, your argument is that there should simply be more efficient corruption!

Although that would be an improvement, given I think we've gone well beyond the point of diminishing returns, that's not what I said. Our process is inefficient, byzantine, and needlessly long and expensive. When the Irish military selected a new pistol a few years back, did the process as mandated by law and regulation take two years and cost fifteen million Euro just to decide that H&K would win, on top of the actual cost of buying them? Do you believe that the Irish selection process was fair regardless?

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

My reading is that he is not a bad nomination at all.

The only real fly in the ointment is his comment about Mueller's investigation. Given that criticism is most likely the only reason Trump picked him, there are legitimate concerns that he would try to interfere.

If the Dems do as good a job at this nomination hearing as they did of William Saxbe (Maddow did a great programme on it last night), Nixon's his 4th AG, then there will be no real issue.

What impact do the comments made during these hearings have later on?

Barr appears to be saying the right things with respect to the Mueller investigation , but so what?

If he (or indeed any nominee) promises not to interfere with the investigation (or whatever thing a nominee is asked about) and then goes ahead and interferes with it. What happens then?

Is there any come-back , legally or otherwise??

Leroy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Although that would be an improvement, given I think we've gone well beyond the point of diminishing returns, that's not what I said. Our process is inefficient, byzantine, and needlessly long and expensive. When the Irish military selected a new pistol a few years back, did the process as mandated by law and regulation take two years and cost fifteen million Euro just to decide that H&K would win, on top of the actual cost of buying them? Do you believe that the Irish selection process was fair regardless?

It is needlessly long and inefficient because of corruption, not because of a lack of it.

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going. Trump, giving an additional $57bn to the military with little or no changes to the systems, is simply adding to the problem.

The reason the wall will not be built is because Trump doesn't have a plan. He doesn't know what he wants, how to solve the problem, how he is going to pay for it and how long it will take.

It is now going to be a fence, so what was the point of the wall prototypes? Another waste of time and money.

Igotadose

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is needlessly long and inefficient because of corruption, not because of a lack of it.

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going. Trump, giving an additional $57bn to the military with little or no changes to the systems, is simply adding to the problem.

The reason the wall will not be built is because Trump doesn't have a plan. He doesn't know what he wants, how to solve the problem, how he is going to pay for it and how long it will take.

It is now going to be a fence, so what was the point of the wall prototypes? Another waste of time and money.

And the amount to spend will be an *enormous* attraction to the bottom-feeders that submit bids. If indeed a $25bn wall is somehow approved, I'd expect it to take 10 years and cost $250bn if not more. This *is* the US Government after all and it's really not interested in reducing costs other than as a political tool.

Manic Moran

Leroy42 wrote: »

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going.

With respect, no.

I have (unfortunately) had to learn the military procurement system as part of my professional education, and a more boring and god-awful course in the Army I doubt I will ever have to suffer through, unless I take the fiscal policy course of which I've had a sample. All the processes present are genuine attempts to maintain transparency and oversight (Unfortunately, the same with fiscal policy and processes, which is why they are so convoluted). If you look at them, they make sense on an individual basis and you can see why they are incorporated, the problem is the cumulative effect once implemented.

There is no wiggle room. It takes as long to receive approval to buy new boots as it does to buy a new jet aircraft. The result is that we obtain equipment which is overpriced and often obsolescent. Only once, by special dispensation, have we had an efficient procurement program in the last few years, the Rapid Fielding Initiative, which basically looked at what soldiers were spending their own money on, and just buying that.

Christy42

Igotadose wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is needlessly long and inefficient because of corruption, not because of a lack of it.

The process takes so long because military contractors have the politicians in their pockets, and ensure that the gravy train keeps going. Trump, giving an additional $57bn to the military with little or no changes to the systems, is simply adding to the problem.

The reason the wall will not be built is because Trump doesn't have a plan. He doesn't know what he wants, how to solve the problem, how he is going to pay for it and how long it will take.

It is now going to be a fence, so what was the point of the wall prototypes? Another waste of time and money.

And the amount to spend will be an *enormous* attraction to the bottom-feeders that submit bids. If indeed a $25bn wall is somehow approved, I'd expect it to take 10 years and cost $250bn if not more. This *is* the US Government after all and it's really not interested in reducing costs other than as a political tool.

Oh I am sure some donations will pay back their dividends if the wall gets built.

Having said that there does not seem to be a decent cost analysis or a serious plan of what to do about private land. We don't have a design yet, will the design vary based off of terrain etc. so I would expect massive overruns regardless.

Given the cost should this not be done before deciding to start building or allocating (this much) funding?

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

What impact do the comments made during these hearings have later on?

Barr appears to be saying the right things with respect to the Mueller investigation , but so what?

If he (or indeed any nominee) promises not to interfere with the investigation (or whatever thing a nominee is asked about) and then goes ahead and interferes with it. What happens then?

Is there any come-back , legally or otherwise??

I don't think there can be a come back, but to give an assurance, with the credibility of an officer of the Court, with a reputation to protect, in front of millions of people, there has to be some weight to that.

I take your point though. Perhaps they could get him to take an oath.

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

I don't think there can be a come back, but to give an assurance, with the credibility of an officer of the Court, with a reputation to protect, in front of millions of people, there has to be some weight to that.

I take your point though. Perhaps they could get him to take an oath.

Is this type of hearing not the same as where Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation and therefore couldn't interfere with it? I would have thought there was some legal weight behind it to the point where you couldn't knowingly lie or if you said you would do X, you are then bound by that.

everlast75

Penn wrote: »

Is this type of hearing not the same as where Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation and therefore couldn't interfere with it? I would have thought there was some legal weight behind it to the point where you couldn't knowingly lie or if you said you would do X, you are then bound by that.

You may be right.

On the whole, he is more appropriate that Kavanaugh and therefore I cannot see him being turned down.

My view on the Dem questioning is they are not good enough. There are plenty of legal experts out there with excellent points that should but aren't being made.

Cheerful Spring

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Th depressing part I find is that although Trump will go down and a lot of his cronies Manafort, Junior, Stone etc and I will be happy. Its the likes of Lindsey Graham, McConnell Nunes and all the GOP worms that enabled him and turned a blind eye over the past 3 years will get with hardly any repercussions. The minute the Mueller report comes out it will be like they had an epiphany and they NEVER know he was that bad. The sad part is the public will believe them :mad::mad::mad:

I expecting a tame report and there no evidence of collusion, saying for the last year or more. We will find out soon. If I am wrong I take the pie in the face.

Zubeneschamali

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I expecting a tame report and there no evidence of collusion

Since even I, a casual observer in a distant land, know there is an assload of evidence for collusion, it is a certainty that Mueller has a lot more.


The fact that Guiliani has come out several times to say collusion is not a crime means he and Trump know that, too.

Penn

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Since even I, a casual observer in a distant land, know there is an assload of evidence for collusion, it is a certainty that Mueller has a lot more.


The fact that Guiliani has come out several times to say collusion is not a crime means he and Trump know that, too.

I think from Trump/Guiliani's end, it'll be more about trying to play down how much Trump knew about it and try put it on people acting on his behalf without his knowledge rather than trying to prove it didn't happen at all. That's probably best case scenario for Trump at this stage.

Leroy42

My forecast is that there will be a huge amount of evidence against all the main people in and around Trump campaign and since. There will be massive amounts of evidence showing Trumps clear ties with Russian business (which lest we forget he has always denied) but there won't be the one piece of evidence showing Trump with Putin.

And they will base their defence of that. They have primed their supporters that anything less that a photo of Putin handing money to Trump whilst Trump gives him the nuclear codes is nothing to worry about. The term, 'it is nothing more than circumstantial evidence' will be trotted out as if it means anything.

Trump will play the lonely fool, fighting back against the dark forces that tried to use him but not tell him.

Mueller is not going to make a judgment on Trump. He will present the evidence and let the Senate/courts decide. And that will be enough for Trump and Giuliani to claim that the report doesn't find Trump guilty, and thus by extension the whole thing is a witch hunt. They will claim that Trump Jr was merely duped into the meeting, the cover up, the inclusion of Kushner and that the Russia expert, Manafort, was simply there to find his phone.

Posters who support him on here, will come on to tell us they are not overly happy with what has gone on but imagine if HC had won, and Obama said that thing to Putin once. And sure the economy is going well so it proves that Trump was right all along.

everlast75

My forecast will be that he will be gone by June.

He will resign.

There is enough in the public arena to know that there was substantial kompromat on Trump. It may have been innocuous at the start, but his behaviour since then has provided further leverage over him.

Sally Yates flipped when Flynn had one matter which he denied in public which the Russians knew to be untrue, and on that basis went to Congress immediately to express her concerns. By way of comparison, the Trump Tower Moscow denial was enough to start the ball rolling with Putin and all he had to do was get Trump to do further actions, which Trump would have to deny, in order to build up a dossier, if you will.

Trump's actions, when one lists them out, show that he has to be compromised. There was a post by a previous boardsie which linked a list and when you read it, you are reminded of the vast amounts of them. It is hard to remember everything in the maelstrom of bullsh1t that is this administration.

Combine the undeniable kompromat, the evidence of what his actions portray by way of underlying motive, with the plethora of witnesses cooperating, in his personal, business and political circles, this is a slam dunk.

I get that people are worn down, and that one does start to wonder if he will ever get his comeuppance, but remember, he is on his heels, in terms of his popularity with the public and the corner he has painted himself into.

The Republican Senators are the only ones saving him at present. There will come a jettison point and it will come.

He "won" in 2016 with the undeniable assistance of the Russians, his friends, in the media including Pecker, racism, that he would "drain the swamp" and on the basis he was an outsider who made all these crazy promises. He has not delivered on one promise, Pecker is now cooperating and the Russians are not going to be able to help him next year. Racism struck out at the midterms. The swamp is murkier than ever, and there have been dozens of scandals. He cannot even maintain a full compliment of staff in the various agencies and departments.

He will resign in order to protect his family, and to avoid prosecution when he leaves, be it this year or when he loses next.

seamus

^^
I do feel like there's at least one-high profile arrest to come (as well as several smaller ones); Kushner and/or Trump Jr will be brought before Mueller, confronted with the evidence and like everyone else Mueller has taken, they will spill their guts out in the hope of securing a plea deal.

The severity of the charges that Mueller is pushing at them carries the death penalty or years in an orange jumpsuit sharing a cell with a tattooed rapist. This is why everyone is taking the plea deals, they're not cut out for this.

I actually don't agree that a photo of Trump handing money to Putin would convince the supporters. Trump could appear on the podium holding hands with Putin, come clean about everything, but so long as he added a note of reassurance that he was doing it in America's interests, his core support would stick by him. The sunken costs bias has left some individuals so closely invested in the Trump dream that they would not let it go, no matter what.

But yes, Mueller is not going to try and indict Trump himself. Way too much red tape in that, way too much potential for it to be framed as a coup attempt by the FBI. But once they have Kushner or Junior, Donald can't try to flip on them. He can't claim that this person was outside of his sphere of influence or that their role in his office has been overstated. Once the treason is in his family, there's no wriggling out of it.

FreudianSlippers

The key to a resignation will be the extent to which Pence is compromised in the Mueller investigation; if Pence is potentially implicated then Trump may as well ride this out and hope he can make it to 2020. If Trump resigns and Pence isn't around to pardon him, then he's in big trouble.

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

My forecast will be that he will be gone by June.

He will resign.

Yeah I think the recent reports that Mueller's team is wrapping things up and preparing their report/findings to be issued next month will likely point to DonJr or Kushner as being seriously implicated at the very least. As the report would have them as the headshot rather than Trump himself, Trump would be able to claim victory in terms of how they didn't find anything to impeach him, but the pressure it'd put on Trump in terms of what it could do for his family might just see him cutting his losses.

Water John

The Kushners are real beauties. Kushners father sends a woman to bed his BIL, then sends the photographs to the man's wife, his own sister.

Leroy42

Penn wrote: »

Yeah I think the recent reports that Mueller's team is wrapping things up and preparing their report/findings to be issued next month will likely point to DonJr or Kushner as being seriously implicated at the very least. As the report would have them as the headshot rather than Trump himself, Trump would be able to claim victory in terms of how they didn't find anything to impeach him, but the pressure it'd put on Trump in terms of what it could do for his family might just see him cutting his losses.

The investigation isn't wrapping up, that is a line SHS, Giuliani etc have been pushing for the last 2 years.

Back in December, Mueller got a 6 month extension to the grand jury. Yesterday, he requested a further 60 day extension to the Gates sentencing, seen by those that supposedly know about these things, as an indicator that Gates will still cooperating and Mueller wants to keep digging.

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

The investigation isn't wrapping up, that is a line SHS, Giuliani etc have been pushing for the last 2 years.

Back in December, Mueller got a 6 month extension to the grand jury. Yesterday, he requested a further 60 day extension to the Gates sentencing, seen by those that supposedly know about these things, as an indicator that Gates will still cooperating and Mueller wants to keep digging.

Can't remember where I read about it supposedly wrapping up, but thought it was a fairly reliable source (eg. not just parroting what Trump's allies were saying). But hadn't heard about the extension to the Gates sentencing. Brexit took most of the Twitter focus yesterday.

duploelabs

https://www.axios.com/paul-manafort-allegedly-used-intermediaries-trump-administration-mueller-83ab3b6a-e152-4224-8346-7518b8a801c7.html
Quite like the idea of Mike Pence being implicated too as it puts the idea of Trump not getting a pardon should he resign.
Lock him up

L1011

President Pelosi anyone? That's what happens in a double resignation. Don't think there'd be time to get a new VP approved if either goes alone first; nor would both houses actually allow it anyway.

ECO_Mental

everlast75 wrote: »

He will resign in order to protect his family, and to avoid prosecution when he leaves, be it this year or when he loses next.

This is the reason why he WONT resign...while being POTUS he has protection eg Dept Justice memo you cant indict a president also he has backing from all his senate cronies. He wields power over a lot and can pull a lot of strings still.



If he resigns he is just a "Joe Public" and will immediately be prosecuted etc unfortunately he will be dragged out kicking and screaming if at all and he has to go for a second term to still have these POTUS privileges.



No way will he resign!

Brian?

L1011 wrote: »

President Pelosi anyone? That's what happens in a double resignation. Don't think there'd be time to get a new VP approved if either goes alone first; nor would both houses actually allow it anyway.

Pelosi is third in line. I can’t imagine it happening though.

Pelvis

Brian? wrote: »

Pelosi is third in line. I can’t imagine it happening though.

Pelosi is 2nd in line, Chuck Grassley is third in line.

everlast75

ECO_Mental wrote: »

This is the reason why he WONT resign...while being POTUS he has protection eg Dept Justice memo you cant indict a president also he has backing from all his senate cronies. He wields power over a lot and can pull a lot of strings still.



If he resigns he is just a "Joe Public" and will immediately be prosecuted etc unfortunately he will be dragged out kicking and screaming if at all and he has to go for a second term to still have these POTUS privileges.



No way will he resign!

My point is that he will be joe public eventually, and therefore it makes sense to strike a deal while he has the leverage of being president.

He will have zero leverage when he is joe public.

The numbers do not look good at this moment in time for re-election and ask yourself... are things getting better or worse for him on a day to day basis. How bad will they be at election time.

That's my logic anyway.

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

My point is that he will be joe public eventually, and therefore it makes sense to strike a deal while he has the leverage of being president.

He will have zero leverage when he is joe public.

The numbers do not look good at this moment in time for re-election and ask yourself... are things getting better or worse for him on a day to day basis. How bad will they be at election time.

That's my logic anyway.

I'd agree. Now, he has political leverage and the Senate behind him. He could strike an agreement that he resigns on condition that he and his family are protected from prosecution or basically any serious consequences. However the longer he tries to cling to power and particularly with the Dems controlling the House, his ability to protect himself and his family is severely hampered, his ability to scupper the special counsel investigation is limited, and come 2020 chances are he'll lose the Senate if not the Presidency itself anyway.

If he's to abuse his position to protect himself and his family before he becomes Joe Public, his best bet would be to do it sooner rather than later. But any deal he makes will likely be contingent on him resigning.

Brian?

Pelvis wrote: »

Pelosi is 2nd in line, Chuck Grassley is third in line.

Yeah. I was including Trump, d’oh.

duploelabs

ECO_Mental wrote: »

This is the reason why he WONT resign...while being POTUS he has protection eg Dept Justice memo you cant indict a president also he has backing from all his senate cronies. He wields power over a lot and can pull a lot of strings still.



If he resigns he is just a "Joe Public" and will immediately be prosecuted etc unfortunately he will be dragged out kicking and screaming if at all and he has to go for a second term to still have these POTUS privileges.



No way will he resign!

Well that is my point from the Axios article I posted, it's touted that Trump will remain in office until the last hour of his term then resign and then the first (and last) act of acting president Pence will be to pardon Trump and he will walk free, much like Ford did with Nixon.
However if Pence is implicated within the Manafort conviction, then that resign/pardon route is off the table

Penn

duploelabs wrote: »

Well that is my point from the Axios article I posted, it's touted that Trump will remain in office until the last hour of his term then resign and then the first (and last) act of acting president Pence will be to pardon Trump and he will walk free, much like Ford did with Nixon.
However if Pence is implicated within the Manafort conviction, then that resign/pardon route is off the table

Trouble for Trump is though that wouldn't protect Don Jr/Ivanka/Jared. Nixon only really had himself to try and protect, but there's nothing stopping charges being brought against Don's family. Donald holding on until the last hour of his Presidency with the agreement for a pardon from Pence works for him as he could push back against charges against him due to being POTUS, but not for anything that could happen with his family between now and the end of his term.

duploelabs

Penn wrote: »

Trouble for Trump is though that wouldn't protect Don Jr/Ivanka/Jared. Nixon only really had himself to try and protect, but there's nothing stopping charges being brought against Don's family. Donald holding on until the last hour of his Presidency with the agreement for a pardon from Pence works for him as he could push back against charges against him due to being POTUS, but not for anything that could happen with his family between now and the end of his term.

If push comes to shove, and given his track record, do you think that Trump is the type of person who take the fall for his family?

Leroy42

Penn wrote: »

Trouble for Trump is though that wouldn't protect Don Jr/Ivanka/Jared. Nixon only really had himself to try and protect, but there's nothing stopping charges being brought against Don's family. Donald holding on until the last hour of his Presidency with the agreement for a pardon from Pence works for him as he could push back against charges against him due to being POTUS, but not for anything that could happen with his family between now and the end of his term.

Doesn't the POTUS have powers to pardon anyone, so Pence can pardon Don Jr, Kushner etc.

Heck, Trump could pardon them a minute before resigning with a pardon from Pence

Itssoeasy

Penn wrote: »

I'd agree. Now, he has political leverage and the Senate behind him. He could strike an agreement that he resigns on condition that he and his family are protected from prosecution or basically any serious consequences. However the longer he tries to cling to power and particularly with the Dems controlling the House, his ability to protect himself and his family is severely hampered, his ability to scupper the special counsel investigation is limited, and come 2020 chances are he'll lose the Senate if not the Presidency itself anyway.

If he's to abuse his position to protect himself and his family before he becomes Joe Public, his best bet would be to do it sooner rather than later. But any deal he makes will likely be contingent on him resigning.

So take the spiro Agnew deal of resigning but not being charged ? The thing is that deal with Agnew in 1973 covered him and him only.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

Doesn't the POTUS have powers to pardon anyone, so Pence can pardon Don Jr, Kushner etc.

Heck, Trump could pardon them a minute before resigning with a pardon from Pence

Pardon certain types of crimes, Federal and certain State crimes

Leroy42

Itssoeasy wrote: »

So take the spiro Agnew deal of resigning but not being charged ? The thing is that deal with Agnew in 1973 covered him and him only.

And before that deal there was no deal. Why are you basing your assumptions on what happened before.

There is no way Trump is going to let his family take a hit on this. He will either pardon them himself or they will be part of a deal.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Was it Obama who spent $65,000 on hot dogs, think it came out of the pizza gate conspiracy?

Itssoeasy

Leroy42 wrote: »

And before that deal there was no deal. Why are you basing your assumptions on what happened before.

There is no way Trump is going to let his family take a hit on this. He will either pardon them himself or they will be part of a deal.

What ? I'm using that example and the Nixon administration as the best comparison to the mess there now.

Leroy42

Itssoeasy wrote: »

What ? I'm using that example and the Nixon administration as the best comparison to the mess there now.

Yeah, I get that, but it seems that you are suggesting that the only deal Trump will get is that only he gets pardoned, and by extension this isn't that useful as it leaves him family exposed.

I am trying to point out that the previous deal places no limits on any deal Trump may look for. We know very well that Trump cares little about precedence or conventionality so why would one think the past has any bearing.

The only thing that limits Trump is what he can get away with.

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

And before that deal there was no deal. Why are you basing your assumptions on what happened before.

There is no way Trump is going to let his family take a hit on this. He will either pardon them himself or they will be part of a deal.

I'm not sure to what extent he could pardon them, given that many of the crimes they could be investigated for could be for Trump Org. dealings rather than tied to the Special Counsel investigation. Plus, issuing pardons to them before charges are brought or before they're convicted, though possible, would significantly impact the Trump's businesses as a whole.

Doing a deal to resign under condition that all pending/issued criminal charges and investigations are dropped against Trump, his family and his businesses could be the only way out for all of them.

everlast75

Any advocates of Trump still prepared to stand over that tax cut for the rich?


https://twitter.com/business/status/1085030967444688896?s=19