Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Penn

duploelabs wrote: »

The Parnas documentation was included in the evidence of the articles of impeachment, he and his lawyer said they're under deadline the night before they conducted the Maddow interview.

Yes, but going through them publicly in a House hearing and having Parnas testifying about them under oath publicly would have greater impact than now in the Senate where they'll likely just be glossed over and ignored.

duploelabs

Penn wrote: »

Yes, but going through them publicly in a House hearing and having Parnas testifying about them under oath publicly would have greater impact than now in the Senate where they'll likely just be glossed over and ignored.

Perhaps, depends on who wins the battle on witnesses (although the tide seems to be turning against McConnell). What alarms me is that if all these bombshells were legally passed to be said in the interview, what wasn't said? What will be revealed later, if as you say it is allowed.

everlast75

Stallingrad wrote: »

Like messages implying the assassination of a US Ambassador by US citizens, that sort of thing?

Text messages from a clearly deranged individual with plenty of issues. He's a bottom feeder.

What I would like is corroborated damning evidence implicating Barr, Pence and Trump.

hotmail.com

Hoop66 wrote: »

Page 1 of every major news organisation yesterday.

The same news organisations that treated the Harry and Megan story as important news?

I'm not saying something controversial. Most people aren't bothered about this. It's only been 20 years since the last impeachment farce.

Leroy42

hotmail.com wrote: »

The same news organisations that treated the Harry and Megan story as important news?

I'm not saying something controversial. Most people aren't bothered about this. It's only been 20 years since the last impeachment farce.

But it's just your opinion, you have been asked for evidence and haven't provided any.

The fact that many people are not interested doesn't make any less historic. The fact that you seem totally bored with is irrelevant.

To many people the Harry and Megan story is important news.

But the great thing about media is that one can choose from the variety of stories which ones we want to concentrate on. So for some the football results are important, others its the weather etc.

And in relation to the last farce as you call it, have the GOP come out to say that what they did was a farce? That they mistreated Clinton, that it was wrong to undertake the impeachment?

pixelburp

hotmail.com wrote: »

The same news organisations that treated the Harry and Megan story as important news?

I'm not saying something controversial. Most people aren't bothered about this. It's only been 20 years since the last impeachment farce.

Maybe you answered this already, but as a "politics anorak", what DOES constitute some historical significance in your mind? You keep dropping in to suggest that if it doesn't have material effect on the populous all this is just some distraction, but by that metric Watergate would qualify - despite it being a demonstrable historical noteworthy time.

duploelabs

hotmail.com wrote: »

The same news organisations that treated the Harry and Megan story as important news?

I'm not saying something controversial. Most people aren't bothered about this. It's only been 20 years since the last impeachment farce.

Not that it's relevant to the thread, but the voluntary departure (effectively) of Harry and Megan from the royal family hasn't been seen in nearly 90 years

hotmail.com

duploelabs wrote: »

Not that it's relevant to the thread, but the voluntary departure (effectively) of Harry and Megan from the royal family hasn't been seen in nearly 90 years

It could have been 900 years. He's not in the direct line of succession. At best the story was tabloid fodder.

This undermines the seriousness with which media organisations take stories. It reminds us that they're only chasing ratings.

Trump has taken advantage of this of course.

pixelburp

hotmail.com wrote: »

It could have been 900 years. He's not in the direct line of succession. At best the story was tabloid fodder.

This undermines the seriousness with which media organisations take stories. It reminds us that they're only chasing ratings.

Trump has taken advantage of this of course.

So back in the day of News at 10, and when the primary source were nightly bulletins, did those "...and finally" segments about waterskiing squirrels and the like also blow the respectability of outlets out of the water too?

There has always been fluff in the news, but it doesn't - and shouldn't - mean you use it as a rod to beat the overall editorial policy. One swallow doesn't make a summer.

aloyisious

everlast75 wrote: »

Um, that was from a dictionary. The thing that tells us what words mean?



I treat him the same way I treat Cohen.

Bring the receipts, or else take a hike. He is out to save his own skin and is only doing so because he was caught.

I genuinely hope he has the paperwork to back it all up.

I'd imagine the saving of his own skin also includes saving his naturalized US citizenship in respect of convictions against US federal laws, that such a loss would be a great incentive for him given the result would mean being sent back to his country of birth minus US citizens protection rights. I wouldn't imagine there would be much of a welcoming committee there for him.

hotmail.com

pixelburp wrote: »

So back in the day of News at 10, and when the primary source were nightly bulletins, did those "...and finally" segments about waterskiing squirrels and the like also blow the respectability of outlets out of the water too?

There has always been fluff in the news, but it doesn't - and shouldn't - mean you use it as a rod to beat the overall editorial policy. One swallow doesn't make a summer.

The Royal story was the top story on many "reputable" news organisations and given ridiculous coverage.

You're right.. it should have been the "and finally" story..

Gwen Cooper

hotmail.com wrote: »

It could have been 900 years. He's not in the direct line of succession. At best the story was tabloid fodder.

This undermines the seriousness with which media organisations take stories. It reminds us that they're only chasing ratings.

Trump has taken advantage of this of course.

Just wondering, the Trump administration is currently throwing the word 'historic' everywhere in association with the trade deal Trump signed yesterday. Does that qualify as historic in your books?

everlast75

anyway, getting away from whether Hotmail.com thinks that the impeachment is historical...

https://twitter.com/jedshug/status/1217613847273574402?s=20

Seriously, Barr is one of the shadiest characters in this whole mess. If Trump goes, I can see Barr going next.


https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1217794903318593536?s=20

At least we have some hope of a proper investigation into this mess

Timberrrrrrrr

hotmail.com wrote: »

It could have been 900 years. He's not in the direct line of succession. At best the story was tabloid fodder.

This undermines the seriousness with which media organisations take stories. It reminds us that they're only chasing ratings.

Trump has taken advantage of this of course.

He's 6th in line, if he was 60th it would be a different story.

Gbear

everlast75 wrote: »

Seriously, Barr is one of the shadiest characters in this whole mess. If Trump goes, I can see Barr going next.

What truly needs to happen is for the next non-nakedly-corrupt adminsitration to clean house and send all these people to jail.

If there isn't an intervention soon, then the decades of lawlessness of US administrations are going to be more and more openly acceptable. This current one isn't an aberration, but the next logical step for the Republican party, and as norms are eroded and laws ignored, the Democrats mightn't be as bad, but things considered unconscionable by them before will become the norm.

The murder of Soleimani probably wasn't much different to much of what the US has done previously, but even at their worst before, there was some separation from the top and at least the veneer of denianbility.

Trump has shown that the US can, to at least some extent, get away with even more than they already have been, and the behaviour will only push the limit further and further until it snaps.

everlast75

This seems significant...

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1217823259938508803?s=19

Is this the proof needed for his impeachment?

eire4

Gbear wrote: »

What truly needs to happen is for the next non-nakedly-corrupt adminsitration to clean house and send all these people to jail.

If there isn't an intervention soon, then the decades of lawlessness of US administrations are going to be more and more openly acceptable. This current one isn't an aberration, but the next logical step for the Republican party, and as norms are eroded and laws ignored, the Democrats mightn't be as bad, but things considered unconscionable by them before will become the norm.

The murder of Soleimani probably wasn't much different to much of what the US has done previously, but even at their worst before, there was some separation from the top and at least the veneer of denianbility.

Trump has shown that the US can, to at least some extent, get away with even more than they already have been, and the behaviour will only push the limit further and further until it snaps.

Your absolutely correct in that IMHO about the next administration needing to act to end this criminal behaviour and go after those responsible. Sadly I doubt this will happen. The US is already at best an oligarchy and there is really only a choice between evil and lesser evil due to the duopoly cartel on power the Republicans and Democrats hold. As a classic example of how unlikely the Democrats are to do anything look at Obama's response to wall street sinking the economy. He comes in and does exactly nothing to any wall street bakers despite all their criminal behaviour. I would expect more of the same from the Democrats if they take over next November.

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

This seems significant...

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1217823259938508803?s=19

Is this the proof needed for his impeachment?

It should be , but it won't.

Facts and Evidence do not matter anymore , all that matters is public opinion.

And for now Trump (as he always has been) sits at ~90% support among GOP voters , as long as that doesn't materially shift for the worst, absolutely nothing will change no matter what evidence comes to light.

Fonny122

It looks like Ukraine are opening a criminal investigation into the stalking and potential assassination plot on Maria Yovanovich (the US ambassador). https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-investigates-threats-against-marie-yovanovitch-2020-1

Ukraine on Thursday announced it would launch a federal criminal investigation into alleged threats against Marie Yovanovitch while she was serving as the US ambassador to Ukraine.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs released a statement saying it was aware of "the materials published by the investigators, related to possible illegal surveillance on the former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch on the Ukrainian territory."

It added that it "with regard to international and national legislation, guarantees protection, safety, and untouchability for diplomats of any foreign state on the territory of Ukraine, including the representatives of the diplomatic corps of the United States of America."

Quin_Dub

Fonny122 wrote: »

It looks like Ukraine are opening a criminal investigation into the stalking and potential assassination plot on Maria Yovanovich (the US ambassador). https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-investigates-threats-against-marie-yovanovitch-2020-1

The response from Trump/GOP will be "See we told you the Ukrainians were interfering in our elections to help the Dems , here they go again!!"

amandstu

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The response from Trump/GOP will be "See we told you the Ukrainians were interfering in our elections to help the Dems , here they go again!!"

I wonder how much animosity there is among some Ukranians for the disrepectful and cynical way they have apparently been treated by the US administration.

Might some be champing at the bit to get their own back?

They have every right and duty to investigate these claims,I would have thought.

everlast75

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It should be , but it won't.

Facts and Evidence do not matter anymore , all that matters is public opinion.

And for now Trump (as he always has been) sits at ~90% support among GOP voters , as long as that doesn't materially shift for the worst, absolutely nothing will change no matter what evidence comes to light.

Fine.

Mulvaney is guilty here too. Why shouldn't he go?

Quin_Dub

amandstu wrote: »

I wonder how much animosity there is among some Ukranians for the disrepectful and cynical way they have apparently been treated by the US administration.

Might some be champing at the bit to get their own back?

They have every right and duty to investigate these claims,I would have thought.

Oh they absolutely do and in a normal world, a country would want a "host Country" to investigate potential threats against their embassy staff.

But this isn't a normal world.

everlast75 wrote: »

Fine.

Mulvaney is guilty here too. Why shouldn't he go?

Don't disagree at all

They might throw someone under the bus as a distraction but it won't be someone as close to Trump as Mulvaney.

Itssoeasy

amandstu wrote: »

I wonder how much animosity there is among some Ukranians for the disrepectful and cynical way they have apparently been treated by the US administration.

Might some be champing at the bit to get their own back?

They have every right and duty to investigate these claims,I would have thought.

I think it's in Ukraines interests to find out what happened with the former ambassador and whether there was actual surveillance and someone on the inside as the messages suggest for the simple reason that the Ukraine will want to reassure countries who have embassies and consulates that their people are safe.

Brian?

everlast75 wrote: »

This seems significant...

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1217823259938508803?s=19

Is this the proof needed for his impeachment?

I see there’s already been hand waving dismissal from GOP senators and “But Obama” responses from the administration.

Outlaw Pete

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Facts and Evidence do not matter anymore , all that matters is public opinion.

Comments like this from your side of the aisle are laughable.

For over three years you all pushed the lie that Trump had colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election and ignored every single piece of evidence to the contrary. Not only that, but simultaneously also dismissed facts and evidence which clearly showed that FBI officials had spied on the Trump campaign, lied to the FISA courts in order to keep doing so, and leaked investigation information to the media in a clear and concerted effort at misleading the public into believing that the Kremlin had compromising information on Trump and that he was effectively in their pocket. So spare me the nonsense about facts and evidence not mattering to those who support him as POTUS as tis your good selves which are prone to looking the other way when the truth doesn't fit your nauseating narrative that Trump is the devil incarnate.

Manic Moran

Brian? wrote: »

Every recent president has done it, except Trump of course.

The first bill he signed he just his Sharpie as normal, even though the souvenir pens were laid out.

Traditionally each pen is given to someone who has sponsored the bill or who had a large part to play in its creation. It’s a nice tradition to recognise people who’ve worked hard on something.

That said, there is some observation that the act both increased the partisanship of the process, and undermined Pelosi's own statements.
See CNN's chief political correspondent and their senior political reporter's position here. "Pelosi's move at signing called 'jarring' and 'unusual'"
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/01/15/pelosi-signing-impeachment-articles-pens-tsr-vpx.cnn

Also provided fodder for the late-night comic crowd, who usually will reliably go after Trump.

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Comments like this from your side of the aisle are laughable.

For over three years you all pushed the lie that Trump had colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election and ignored every single piece of evidence to the contrary. Not only that, but simultaneously also dismissed facts and evidence which clearly showed that FBI officials had spied on the Trump campaign, lied to the FISA courts in order to keep doing so, and leaked investigation information to the media in a clear and concerted effort at misleading the public into believing that the Kremlin had compromising information on Trump and that he was effectively in their pocket. So spare me the nonsense about facts and evidence not mattering to those who support him as POTUS as tis your good selves which are prone to looking the other way when the truth doesn't fit your nauseating narrative that Trump is the devil incarnate.

More mop and bucket nonsense.

You laud the Mueller report for "exonerating" Trump but point blank refuse to contemplate the obstruction of justice proof. You also choose to disregard that Trump invited, welcomed and benefited from the Russian interference. Trump still doesn't side with his own intelligence agencies when they concluded Russia interfered.

Every thing does point to Putin.

Trump could simply release his tax returns, but doesn't and we're expected to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Trump constantly does what Putin wants to happen.

Trump shreds records of meeting with him.

These are facts. You can have your own opinion, but not your own facts.

But no folks, nothing to see here.


Not content in cheating once, he is doing it again. He had HIS lawyer PERSONALLY digging up dirt on a political opponent. It is highly likely that he has two thugs doing his bidding below the radar in a russian shakedown, a drug deal according to Bolton. Is he believable to you, or is he a "never Trumper" too.

Trump can't win with a fair fight. It's why he's blocked every request for a document or testimony.

Your posts show you only see what you want to see. Why not tell us more about how Trump deserves 5 more years or such utter nonsense.

duploelabs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Comments like this from your side of the aisle are laughable.

For over three years you all pushed the lie that Trump had colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election and ignored every single piece of evidence to the contrary. Not only that, but simultaneously also dismissed facts and evidence which clearly showed that FBI officials had spied on the Trump campaign, lied to the FISA courts in order to keep doing so, and leaked investigation information to the media in a clear and concerted effort at misleading the public into believing that the Kremlin had compromising information on Trump and that he was effectively in their pocket. So spare me the nonsense about facts and evidence not mattering to those who support him as POTUS as tis your good selves which are prone to looking the other way when the truth doesn't fit your nauseating narrative that Trump is the devil incarnate.

When you're done with your nonsense drivel, I'll ask you again to refresh me as to when the Obama administration assassinated such a high level government official as you alluded to a few pages ago.

I say AGAIN, as you've done your usual dump and run again and again and again. Tis a pity you're not up for a proper debate or care to back up your claims

Midlife

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Comments like this from your side of the aisle are laughable.

For over three years you all pushed the lie that Trump had colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election and ignored every single piece of evidence to the contrary. Not only that, but simultaneously also dismissed facts and evidence which clearly showed that FBI officials had spied on the Trump campaign, lied to the FISA courts in order to keep doing so, and leaked investigation information to the media in a clear and concerted effort at misleading the public into believing that the Kremlin had compromising information on Trump and that he was effectively in their pocket. So spare me the nonsense about facts and evidence not mattering to those who support him as POTUS as tis your good selves which are prone to looking the other way when the truth doesn't fit your nauseating narrative that Trump is the devil incarnate.

How can you support Trump and say facts matter?

Are you serious with this?