Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

rossie1977

An investigation started by Trump's own DA behind closed doors with no public interviews resulted in almost 100 indictments, two dozens criminal convictions and a couple of prison sentences with the head of investigation saying he hadn't the authority to charge the president with a crime.

Based on that surely a public investigation by the Democrats should yield nothing right..

aloyisious

rossie1977 wrote: »

An investigation started by Trump's own DA behind closed doors with no public interviews resulted in almost 100 indictments, two dozens criminal convictions and a couple of prison sentences with the head of investigation saying he hadn't the authority to charge the president with a crime.

Based on that surely a public investigation by the Democrats should yield nothing right..

Going off at a tangent here; When the next Democrat president takes up office and appoints a AG, will they have the bottle to take a fresh look at the wording of the advisory letter on a sitting president not being prosecutable and changing it to ensure there is room to stretch the envelope or whether they would be too scared for fear of future consequences. Something tells me despite all the bleating, they;ll leave it untouched in the file.

Christy42

Water John wrote: »

McConnell would be sharp and probably has already assessed, it's too hot to handle. He doesn't care who's in the WH to implement right wing GOP policy. Pence, if he escapes will do fine.

If they admit Trump was wrong they are guaranteed to lose 2020.

While he fights it some defend Trump's innocence to the death. He will not impeach Trump. It is his only chance to maintain some power after 2020

duploelabs

rossie1977 wrote: »

An investigation started by Trump's own DA behind closed doors with no public interviews resulted in almost 100 indictments, two dozens criminal convictions and a couple of prison sentences with the head of investigation saying he hadn't the authority to charge the president with a crime.

Based on that surely a public investigation by the Democrats should yield nothing right..

Many times Mueller said, when questioned, that things were outside the scope of his investigation. Several items he did pass on to the FBI to be looked into when discovered.
Impeachment is a whole different kettle of fish as there's going to be 6 or 7 different aspects to the investigation, each headed up by the committees in the house

duploelabs

Ludo wrote: »

Might be subpoenad but that is fine. As unlikely as it is that they will remove Trump, there is no way on earth that both Trump and Pence will be taken out by this as that would create President Pelosi.

Depends on who knew what about Trump's shenanigans. If Pence is complaisent in pressuring the Ukraine, as Trump has eluded to, then its possible that he could get dragged down too.

everlast75

Over 1000 former and current prosecutors opine that Trump obstructed justice following the Mueller probe.


Now this...

'More than 300 former officials call Trump’s actions concerning Ukraine ‘profound national security concern’

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/nearly-300-former-officials-call-trumps-actions-concerning-ukraine-profound-national-security-concern/2019/09/27/254c09ac-e09e-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html#click=https://t.co/HZ5t2lTwf1

amandstu

U9

duploelabs wrote: »

Many times Mueller said, when questioned, that things were outside the scope of his investigation. Several items he did pass on to the FBI to be looked into when discovered.
Impeachment is a whole different kettle of fish as there's going to be 6 or 7 different aspects to the investigation, each headed up by the committees in the house

An impeachment process should ensure complete compliance from all witnesses with potential prison sentences for non compliance.

Obstruction of the impeachment process is grounds for impeachment in itself .

Am I right?

Everything in the Mueller report can be teased out in public surely...

Will Mueller have any role in this new process?

Water John

The Dems are anxious to largely focus on the Ukraine issue. They are doing this to keep the message simple for the public to grasp and get traction.

amandstu

Water John wrote: »

The Dems are anxious to largely focus on the Ukraine issue. They are doing this to keep the message simple for the public to grasp and get traction.

I see that ,but there might be overlap and if the Mueller's team can provide relevant information that could maybe come into play.

On a sour note,they were saying on MFinucane that Hunter Biden was ill advised to be in Ukraine at all....

Itssoeasy

Just turned on CNN to see who was on to defend the Trump administration and its Jim Jordan who isn't wearing a jacket again. I mean when you're having to rely on Jim Jordan to defend you, you know things aren't good.

everlast75

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Just turned on CNN to see who was on to defend the Trump administration and its Jim Jordan who isn't wearing a jacket again. I mean when you're having to rely on Jim Jordan to defend you, you know things aren't good.

Indeed. And for once, there is immediate push back on lies being told... with some side order of home truths...


https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1178308638680604674?s=19

Outlaw Pete

duploelabs wrote: »

Don't bother, he just scrapers when challenged. Useless poster

I presume you mean scarper, but no, I don't. There's two main reasons (aside from simply not seeing it) which might explain why I have not have replied to a post:

1) If someone doesn't afford a user the level of respect which they themselves would like to be afforded, then why should that user bother engaging with them? They shouldn't. Oh and endorsing abusive posts by by thanking them is just as disrespectful as actually being abusive by the way.

2) I am not going to repeat myself over and over again (and nor should I feel any user or that matter). There's at least a 40 to 1 <-leftist-moderate-> split on this thread (for reasons best not gotten into right now) and you simple can't expect 'moderate->' users to indulge every single '<-leftist' who quotes them. Addressing the reason for such a split would solve the problem of unaddressed replies from those in the minority far quicker I feel, but that's for another thread, in another location, but one which I'd happily partake in given that I feel it's symptomatic of much larger problem which absolutely needs addressing.

With regards to Omar and the accusation Trump was being racist by saying what he did about her and her sidekicks, the post which I addressed that in is here.

everlast75 wrote: »

'More than 300 former officials call Trump’s actions concerning Ukraine ‘profound national security concern’

As meaningless as the 1000 they got to sign re: the Mueller report. We already know that American liberals in some of the highest positions of power were willing to throw their reputation in the toilet to get behind ousting Trump from office and so it's hardly surprising that they can get a bunch of signatures.

Outlaw Pete

Lindsey nails it here (whilst wearing a jacket) about Pelosi and those hiding behind her:

"If you believe that Donald Trump did something to hurt this country you owe it to vote not talk about impeaching the president. The only way to open up an impeachment inquiry is to vote. We need a John Hancock moment from House Democrats. Quit hiding behind Nancy Pelosi. If you think the president did something wrong in this phone call then vote to open up an article of impeachment inquiry and a lot of House Democrats won't because they're afraid."

https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/1178317908440748032

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

As meaningless as the 1000 they got to sign re: the Mueller report. We already know that American liberals in some of the highest positions of power were willing to throw their reputation in the toilet to get behind ousting Trump from office and so it's hardly surprising that they can get a bunch of signatures.

The people who signed these documents are from both sides if the aisle, who have served previous administrations.

You really must believe that every single person out there who has a problem with Trump are wrong, and only he is right? Seriously?

You need a reality check.

There's an old phrase that fits.

If you walk down the road, and meet one a$$hole, that's unfortunate.

However, if all you ever meet, all day, everyday is an a$$hole, guess what - you're the a$$hole.

Maybe, just maybe, Trump is the problem here.

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Lindsey nails it here (whilst wearing a jacket) about Pelosi and those hiding behind her:




https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/1178317908440748032

It was notable that the people doing the rounds for Trump today were Graham, Miller and Jordan. No Pompeo, Barr or McConnel for some reason.


As for Graham, that wasn't a great performance. It was mostly hammering the hearsay stuff while simultaneously trying to say that the contents of the call weren't problematic. Fair enough, it's a tough one to defend but if you've moved to the "Not concerning" talking point, it's probably better to drop the hearsay one.

peddlelies

Trump going mental on twitter, retweeting 20+ accounts slamming Ed Henry's exchange with Mark Levin. Ed Henry just recently took time off to donate part of his liver to his sister.

mcmoustache

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Just turned on CNN to see who was on to defend the Trump administration and its Jim Jordan who isn't wearing a jacket again. I mean when you're having to rely on Jim Jordan to defend you, you know things aren't good.

You have to cut them a bit of slack here. Nobody wants to be made a tit out of on national tv to defend Trump. This particular incident is really, really hard to defend without looking stupid so its understandable that the heavy hitters would try to sit this one out.

everlast75

Fox beginning to turn on Fox...


https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178353809589972992?s=19

mcmoustache

Polling is what will determine how this goes. Politicians like getting elected. Here's a recent one from CBS.



How these numbers move are going to affect the positions of most congress people and senators. Recent polls did not have this level of support.

From Trump's end, he'll need a well oiled machine of people unified in purpose instead of looking out for themselves.

Mulveney will have his hands full so hopefully he has a plan and doesn't email it to the Dems again. Giuliani will need to stop implicating everyone. In fact, he should stop talking completely. Trump himself will also need to stop talking. They'll also need to make sure that they weren't up to any other shenanigans, lest they end up with more whistle-blowing. Anyone want to take bets on whether or not Trump can navigate a way out of this and suggest how?

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

Fox beginning to turn on Fox...


https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1178353809589972992?s=19

If FOX turn on Trump, expect to hear him telling people to watch OANN or something.

mcmoustache

mcmoustache wrote: »

Anyone want to take bets on whether or not Trump can navigate a way out of this and suggest how?

not for the moment....:)

mcmoustache

Deleted User wrote: »

not for the moment....:)

Well, I could but it would mean bringing some smart people on board and getting rid of the gobsh!tes. Outside of Barr, most of the people around Trump are second-tier.


Then again, Barr is distancing himself from this even though he was definitely involved. I wonder if these people around Trump are loyal selfless people or if they're going to look out for themselves.

Outlaw Pete

Lindsey also raised the following important point which raises something very suspect:

"I want to know why they changed the rules about whistleblowers; the hearsay rule was changed just a short period of time before the complaint was filed."

No democrat truly cares about any of this though, as death by a thousand cuts is the clear objective. These people don't care about potential quid pro quos, nor about politicians requesting that officials in foreign countries cooperate with investigations into their opposition ... otherwise they'd be up in arms about Biden using $1bln in US funds to get people fired and how the Obama administration behaved in the run up to the 2016 election ... but there was, and has been, nothing but tumbleweeds from them on those issues... which shows that's all about politics rather than having any genuine belief that such things are abhorrent.

Hopefully this attempt at impeaching Trump for having the audacity to expose corruption and the attempts of a foreign country to interfere in US elections will fail, and investigation and prosecution of those who are really rotten to the core can get underway, as I'm sure it will as soon as the Durham-Horowitz reports are released.

"I want to know why they changed the rules about whistleblowers; the hearsay rule was changed just a short period of time before the complaint was filed."

There were approximately 0 gay marriages until the laws to allow it were changed. So there's that.

mcmoustache

The hearsay talking point became irrelevant once the Trump version of the transcript came out and the Whitehouse admitted that it was put on the code-word level server. It's stops being hearsay after a confession. But feel free to keep using it.

Outlaw Pete

Reading contradictory info re 'formal impeachments' and articles of impeachment so removed the comments about Pelosi but it sure seems odd that there already was attempts to impeach Trump which involved the house having to vote, and which all failed, but yet now there apparently is a 'formal impeachment inquiry' but this time there was no house vote.

mcmoustache

That was Al Greene and his calls for impeachment were silly. They hadn't had congressional or popular support and Trump hadn't admitted to as many impeachable offenses. It was also jumping the gun a bit - voting for impeachment without an inquiry first was silly.

Outlaw Pete

mcmoustache wrote: »

The hearsay talking point became irrelevant once the Trump version of the transcript came out and the Whitehouse admitted that it was put on the code-word level server. It's stops being hearsay after a confession. But feel free to keep using it.

Incorrect, even Pelosi has said it is not just about the phone call, but what was also alleged by the whistleblower, and that very much all is hearsay ... but even if that were not true, the timing of the change is still very suspect and the subsequent release of the call does not in any way, shape or form, negate that.

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Incorrect, even Pelosi has said it is not just about the phone call, but what was also alleged by the whistleblower, and that very much all is hearsay ... but even if that were not true, the timing of the change is still very suspect and the subsequent release of the call does not in any way, shape or form, negate that.

4 things about your hearsay nonsense

1) We. Have. The. White. House. Transcript. Trump's *own version* of what happened. The awful thing for Trump is, that's enough. Without any report, from anyone else, its grounds for investigation.

2) the report alligns perfectly with Trump's own notes. That is to say, Trump's note corroborate the report, which gives probative value of the report - it backs it up.

3) Trump's own IG AND Acting DNI say they checked into the report and THEY found it credible - are they partisan hacks too?

4) If you have a problem with the "evidence" of the whistleblower, then let's call the people the Whistleblower spoke to - see if the assertions stand up, because one thing is for certain, Trump abused his power *according to his own notes*, and no amount of whataboutery or lies can change that.

Igotadose

If your skin hasn't crawled lately, here's Creepy Stephen Miller on Fox news going at it with Chris Wallace. About 3:50 in, they go at it about Trump using private lawyers to 'investigate' corruption in the Ukraine (i.e., clumsily attempt to dig up dirt on Biden.) I'll give Miller credit for staying on point - bizzaro conspiracy-theory point that ends up being 'we won the election' in the end, but he's consistent. Chris Wallace did beat him up pretty good though.

https://youtu.be/vXUWHk7sqe0