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

aloyisious

The White House has released the opinion-piece of a DOJ Asst AG, Steven Engel, which it intends using as part of its defence case that Don Trump had the right to tell his staff to ignore the subpoenas from the house committee as the committee had not been empowered by a vote in the house to carry out an investigation at the time it issued subpoenas. So in respect of the obstruction of congress the committee says Don carried out by telling his staff to ignore the subpoenas, there may be no legal case for Don to answer.

It seems there's a chance that Don may have got lucky in issuing his ignore the subpoenas instructions but the committee people may have a rebuttal answer to Mr Engels legal advice memo. Not for one moment do I think that Don had been given legal advice at or before the time he issued his instruction that he had the right to do so, but he was just doing what he always does, do whatever he felt like doing regardless of consequences. DOJ legal advice memos keep cropping up in this affair: the sacking of the FBI Director.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2020-01-20/justice-dept-memos-back-defiance-of-impeachment-subpoenas

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/trump-impeachment-justice-department/2020/01/20/id/950532/

Itssoeasy

https://twitter.com/josephabondy/status/1219401134646931457?s=21

So VP mike pence claimed to not know Lev Parnas but Mr Parnas can prove otherwise. Nice touch on the music btw.

Itssoeasy

https://twitter.com/josephabondy/status/1217932038260625410?s=21

I realise that Donald trump saying he doesn't know lev Parnas despite the evidence to the contrary(and the fact that trump can't tell the truth) the above video is clear evidence in my mind that he shock horror does know Mr Parnas.

everlast75

Historic day today.

Mitch appears to have ditched the claim to follow the Clinton model, which was never the case anyway.

The most transparent president ever, refusing to turn over tax records, bank records, any documents requested by Congress and also blocks every witness from testifying, looking for the quickest trial ever.

I knew it was going to be a sham. I'm just hoping its the most outrageous sham possible, so Senators up for reelection will get their comeuppance.

handlemaster

Trump live on weforum.org now

Quin_Dub

##Mod Note##

Moved ~20 Posts about Gun Violence/Gun Control to a new thread , found here

Please go there to continue that conversation.

Thanks

eire4

everlast75 wrote: »

Historic day today.

Mitch appears to have ditched the claim to follow the Clinton model, which was never the case anyway.

The most transparent president ever, refusing to turn over tax records, bank records, any documents requested by Congress and also blocks every witness from testifying, looking for the quickest trial ever.

I knew it was going to be a sham. I'm just hoping its the most outrageous sham possible, so Senators up for reelection will get their comeuppance.

I was thinking that. If they make this whole process in the senate a total joke this may well come back to bite them in the ass come next November.

Leroy42

eire4 wrote: »

I was thinking that. If they make this whole process in the senate a total joke this may well come back to bite them in the ass come next November.

In a normal democracy, one that actually works rather than the greatest democracy(tm) in the world, it would have an effect, but I think the US has lost all sense of patriotism and the party becomes before country in nearly every case.

I mean that for both the politicians and the voters.

They dress it up as a love of America, but really it is just a love of their view of what America is and they have no interest, or time, in any alternative view.

hotmail.com

everlast75 wrote: »

Historic day today.

Mitch appears to have ditched the claim to follow the Clinton model, which was never the case anyway.

The most transparent president ever, refusing to turn over tax records, bank records, any documents requested by Congress and also blocks every witness from testifying, looking for the quickest trial ever.

I knew it was going to be a sham. I'm just hoping its the most outrageous sham possible, so Senators up for reelection will get their comeuppance.

Your head must be spinning with all these historic days.

Ludo

Schiff is very, very, very good at this.

Then again, they are very obvious points he is making. Not that it will matter a damn though.

PropJoe10

I just don't get how Republicans can just stick their fingers in their ears over this. They at least need to hear the ample evidence against Trump. This trial is going to be a disgrace of epic proportions.

Ludo

Ludo wrote: »

Schiff is very, very, very good at this.

Sekulow is not very good at this.

Deflection central.

looksee

Sekulow is amazingly weak, hard to imagine he is a top lawyer.

The Phantom Jipper

Is Sekulow not obliged to speak truthfully at this stage, or is this him giving his own opinion? Seemed to be misrepresenting what the Mueller report says about obstruction of justice, among other things.

looksee

Everything he has said we have already heard as Whitehouse spin.

Ludo

Schiff - cool, calm, logical. facts.

Sekulow and Cippolone - faux anger, desk banging, deflection.

I know they are both playing to an audience and the way they play/act tells me which side I should be on.

SeamusFX

Tried to watch the impeachment hearings, but the blatant lies spewing from the mouths of Sekulow and Cippolone made that impossible. The pathetic BS and lies they’re spewing is unbelievable and disgusting!

sid waddell

Pelosi shouldn't have let this sham happen, it was correctly said over and over and over again that moving the articles of impeachment to the Senate would result in a total sham of a "trial". Democrats should have sat on the articles of impeachment until November and kept adding to them, dragging Trump's presidency deeper and deeper into the mire.

SeamusFX

sid waddell wrote: »

Pelosi shouldn't have let this sham happen, it was correctly said over and over and over again that moving the articles of impeachment to the Senate would result in a total sham of a "trial". Democrats should have sat on the articles of impeachment until November and kept adding to them, dragging Trump's presidency deeper and deeper into the mire.

Absolutely, I’ve been saying that all along. No point in handing over the articles of impeachment to a crooked, traitorous and totally biased and rigged GOP controlled senate. Then these hacks have the balls to claim the Dems stalled handing it to the Senate because the case is so weak. If that statement wasn’t so dangerous it would be hilarious, but sadly there are stupid Deplorables who will believe these lies!

Gbear

sid waddell wrote: »

Pelosi shouldn't have let this sham happen, it was correctly said over and over and over again that moving the articles of impeachment to the Senate would result in a total sham of a "trial". Democrats should have sat on the articles of impeachment until November and kept adding to them, dragging Trump's presidency deeper and deeper into the mire.

The public are largely set in place for whether or not they think Trump is a criminal. I don't think there can be much movement on that point now.

What could they possibly hear that would change their minds now?

He certainly wasn't going to be removed, unless there was literally video uncovered of him murdering a child.

The value in this can only be about creating fodder to attack Senate Republicans with in Novemeber to help to flip the Senate.

hotmail.com

So this is basically a motion of no confidence.

Leroy42

So when faced with corruption, both POTUS and senate, the suggestion is that nothing so be attempted?

If that is your position then Trump and the GOP goal is nearly complete.

Quin_Dub

looksee wrote: »

Sekulow is amazingly weak, hard to imagine he is a top lawyer.

He's not - This is his Bio...

After graduating from law school, Sekulow worked at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as a prosecutor with the tax litigation division for "about 18 months."In 1982, he opened a law firm in Atlanta, Georgia, with former Mercer classmate Stuart Roth which soon evolved into a business buying, renovating, and selling historic properties as a tax shelter for wealthy investors.When IRS regulations changed in the mid-eighties, the law firm and the real estate business collapsed. Sekulow and his partners filed for bankruptcy protection in 1987 and were sued by investors for fraud and securities violations. In 1987 Sekulow became general counsel for Jews for Jesus. In 1988 he founded he founded the nonprofit group Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism (CASE)whose president he is and whose board members are him, his wife, and their two sons.

In 1992, Sekulow became the director of the ACLJ, where he was chief counsel and principal officer in 2018.

Sekulow is half-owner of the for-profit corporation Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group, incorporated in 2003,whose governor and executive officer is Stuart Roth, his partner in the law firm and real estate business that declared bankruptcy in 1986. From 2011 to 2016, the ACLJ paid the group $23 million, "its largest outside expense."

Sekulow owns Regency Productions, the company that produces his radio show and was paid $11.3 million by the two charities for production services between 2000 and 2017.

Sekulow hosts Jay Sekulow Live!, a syndicated daily radio program broadcast on terrestrial radio, and XM and Sirius satellite radios. This live call-in program focuses on legal and legislative topics. Sekulow is the host of ACLJ This Week, a weekly television news program broadcast on Trinity Broadcasting Network and Daystar.

He's a religious fundamentalist with a Radio show and a former bankrupt...that happens to have a law degree.

Leroy42

hotmail.com wrote: »

So this is basically a motion of no confidence.

If by basically you mean totally different and based on the POTUS doing something against the very constitution he swore to uphold and defend, then Yes, I suppose it is!

looksee

Quin_Dub wrote: »

He's not - This is his Bio...



He's a religious fundamentalist with a Radio show and a former bankrupt...that happens to have a law degree.

I didn't express my thought very well - I was suggesting that surely the POTUS would have a top lawyer, but this is what he has. Then I heard the second guy - I use the word deliberately - Cipollone, and he was in fact worse!

peddlelies

Sekulow has argued in front of the supreme court many times and won, probably worth mentioning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Sekulow#List_of_Supreme_Court_cases

Leroy42

peddlelies wrote: »

Sekulow has argued in front of the supreme court many times and won, probably worth mentioning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Sekulow#List_of_Supreme_Court_cases

Yes, it is clear that his lawyers are well trained and professional.

The problem is not with the representation, it is with what they have to work with. They come across as crazy or out of their depth simply because there is little actual legal argument involved, they have to rely and bluff and bluster,

Remember, that Trump himself said in an interview with Stepanopolous that he was more than willing to take information from a foreign government against his opponents.

It is all about deflection and trying to steer the discussion away from the central point,

Look at what has been taken as gospel the last few weeks. That it was not fair that the senate could call witnesses not called in the House. Schiff completely demolished that argument.

The plan is to simply make up any argument and try to run down the clock. In terms of normal scandals, Trump simply tries to ignore, then deny, then argue that others are worse, then it's a witchhunt before finally everyone gets either a bit bored or something even bigger comes up.

Itssoeasy

I've seen a bit of Adam schiff talking and he's as he always is. He's very good at what he does. I'd heard the name pat cippilone before but I'd honestly never heard or seen him until this evening. As others have said him and Jay Secalow(and I've seen secalow on TV and he seems competent and not shouty) are clearly qualified to do the defence, it's the fact that trying to defend Donald trump is trying to play soccer on a pitch that hasn't seen a dry day in months. In orders words there's only so much you can do with the conditions.

briany

How many current Republican senators are there who Trump has talked shít about and are potentially willing to die on their sword?

eire4

briany wrote: »

How many current Republican senators are there who Trump has talked shít about and are potentially willing to die on their sword?

Rubio and Graham come to mind and Cruz as well off the top of my head.