The Next Trump Crisis

#76
#76
A lot of times, when you attack Trump, you are attacking us. I don’t know what a psychologist or sociologist has to do with this.

It's transference. Tell a teenage girl that whatever hot music guy right now isn't all that good and watch the waterworks flow. The brain takes it as a direct attack even though it isn't and actually has nothing to do with the girl.

Science!

And maybe it's because I don't watch any of the network news channels and stick to AP/Reuters/BBC World Service and here for my news and analysis, but the only people I see still using the word deplorable as a political epithet are solidly on the right and the ones frequently talking about attack by proxy.

If I say that I disagree with the color toilet paper Trump puts in the White House, a reasonable and healthy observer would realize I'm talking about the decision and not attempting to make them a victim. If I said I disagree with his appointment of DeVos as education chair, I'm disagree with him and not the reasonable and healthy supporter.

Stop trying to take bullets for the guy. It's just a forum, and you're not him. Any mature person would tell you directly if the problem is with you and your views. Step aside, separate, and realize it's not about you.
 
#77
#77
The impeachment process has achieved something. It has removed deniability from the Republicans. They were enablers; now they are accomplices. They are all Carmela Soprano in the classic scene with the psychiatrist who speaks the truth about her criminal husband: “One thing you can never say: that you haven’t been told.” The Republican Party as an institution has utterly merged itself into the Trump cover-up machine, and there is no escape for any of them—not the concerned Susan Collins nor the troubled Marco Rubio nor the thoughtful Ben Sasse.

When Senate Republicans make complicit fools of themselves Wednesday and vote to acquit their King of his obvious corruption, we move on to the next crisis.

(1) Bolton's Book.

Bolton writes that Trump first tried to put the squeeze on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in early May 2019—and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone was a witness in the very room where the plot was hatched. Even as Cipollone argued on the president’s behalf that witnesses were unnecessary, he was plausibly alleged to be a crucial fact witness by another fact witness. This double-dealing will surely trigger a new battle to compel testimony from Bolton and Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney—and perhaps to discipline Cipollone for unethical legal conduct. During impeachment proceedings, Bolton and Mulvaney defied congressional subpoenas; now there’s yet more urgency to determine what the president’s team of lawyers actually knew at the time they were making Trump’s case before the Senate.

Then will come the crisis of the administration’s battle to suppress Bolton’s book—and all the other narratives that current insiders may want to tell in order to clear their own besmirched reputations. Does Mulvaney enjoy being the designated sucker in chief of this story? Maybe not.

(2) Trump's Taxes / Hush Money

Even worse for Trump and the Republicans, Ukraine is by no means the only dirty secret being covered up. There are others, and perhaps even more damaging. Sometime before the end of June, the U.S. Supreme Court will rule in consolidated cases about whether Trump can continue to keep secret his tax returns and other business documents.

One case began with a New York State grand-jury subpoena of Trump business documents, to probe whether he broke laws when he allegedly paid hush money to two women during the 2016 campaign. The others involve subpoenas by House committees—Oversight, Financial Services, and Intelligence—of tax returns and banking records.

The multiple subpoenas raise different legal issues, especially because the Financial Services and Intelligence subpoenas were served not on Trump or his organization, but on his accounting firm and two of his banks. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of some or all of the subpoenas, damaging financial information will tumble into the public domain right as the election season begins in earnest. Worse, the New York State case could conceivably lead to an indictment of Trump. The current practice is that a serving president cannot be prosecuted for a federal crime. What about a state crime? Vice President Aaron Burr was (unsuccessfully) prosecuted for the killing of Alexander Hamilton in 1804. Beyond that, there are not many relevant precedents. Whatever the ultimate constitutional answer to the question, it’s not a good look for a serving president to end a campaign arguing that he should be immune to state as well as federal criminal law. It raises questions like “Maybe we should have a president who has not committed so many crimes?”

Trump can of course hope that he wins on every point in the Supreme Court. Yet such a victory will not protect him unless it is overwhelming. If Trump wins 5–4, with the newest justice, Brett Kavanaugh, casting a vote for secrecy, this outcome will not command much legitimacy among Trump’s political opponents. Instead, they will charge that a justice whose guilty secret was protected by the president is now protecting the president’s own guilty secrets: yet another quid pro quo in an administration notorious for them.

The Next Trump Crisis

Lol.
Bolton and SDNY. It never ends with you tools. But it never gets old watching you fools by the next conspiracy hook line and sinker
 
#79
#79
That's the whole contention. Voters did not pick the best candidate (in the rep. primaries or general election)
That's like saying you give your kid the choice between McDonald's and the best steak house in town.
Your kid picking McDonald's in no way proves McDonald's is a better restaurant, it only proves that your kid's taste in restaurants isn't very developed.
The whole mystery continues to be, how are people being manipulated into believing that the worst candidate is the best. Anomaly.

It’s only a mystery when you refuse to give America better candidates than they are given. The left has had , going on 4 years , to come up with candidates that would make Americans say .. you know I can get behind their policies, they arent to radical one way or another , and even though Trump has been good for us , I can vote for him or her even across party’s . Instead of doing that , you have the old white multimillionaire socialist , the old white multimillionaire Ex VP that can’t stop trying to relate cornpop stories of the 50s to today’s generation, a multibillionaire who’s bought his way onto the stage convincing the DNC to try and shiv the Bern one last time , a young white millionaire mayor from a midwestern city , thats claiming to be a centrist / progressive that can’t pull enough minority / votes to make it in the southern half of the country , another old white multibillionaire that is a joke , your only minority candidate is trying to give away cash to people and can’t get votes , and finally only because the left trashed the only young woman left , you have and old white privileged multimillionaire thats lied her way into a very prestigious university and has been changing , shifting and lying about her policies ever since . Tell me the steak story again ... I enjoyed it . 😂
 
Last edited:
#80
#80
This is all so damn ridiculous. My damn socialist wife even gave me the whiney “Democracy died in our country this week” tripe talking point line. I’d had enough at that point.

As I pointed out to her, your party losing an election to a candidate you hate and can’t find a means within the constitution to remove because you really really hate him isn’t a damn constitutional crisis and to grow the hell up and act like an adult. You don’t like him? Vote him out! That is our process.

No Trump shouldn’t have gotten that close to the Biden’s in discussions with Ukraine the optics are horrible.

Yes corruption involving Hunter Biden and if it reaches to him Joe Biden is a valid topic for investigation and of our national interests.

No Donald Trump shouldn’t have been the direct communicator on that topic AG Barr should have.

And no none of this rises to the level of impeachment and is a huge waste of time. And after all of this drama many Americans, myself included, are simply not interested in hearing anything more from Team Nancy regarding the 2016 election, Trumps taxes, anything related Ukraine, or any other damn thing that she and her minions screech about. Move the hell on.
 
#81
#81
This is all so damn ridiculous. My damn socialist wife even gave me the whiney “Democracy died in our country this week” tripe talking point line. I’d had enough at that point.

As I pointed out to her, your party losing an election to a candidate you hate and can’t find a means within the constitution to remove because you really really hate him isn’t a damn constitutional crisis and to grow the hell up and act like an adult. You don’t like him? Vote him out! That is our process.

No Trump shouldn’t have gotten that close to the Biden’s in discussions with Ukraine the optics are horrible.

Yes corruption involving Hunter Biden and if it reaches to him Joe Biden is a valid topic for investigation and of our national interests.

No Donald Trump shouldn’t have been the direct communicator on that topic AG Barr should have.

And no none of this rises to the level of impeachment and is a huge waste of time. And after all of this drama many Americans, myself included, are simply not interested in hearing anything more from Team Nancy regarding the 2016 election, Trumps taxes, anything related Ukraine, or any other damn thing that she and her minions screech about. Move the hell on.

Lol .. I had forgotten you said she was a Democrat .
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajvol01
#83
#83
It's transference. Tell a teenage girl that whatever hot music guy right now isn't all that good and watch the waterworks flow. The brain takes it as a direct attack even though it isn't and actually has nothing to do with the girl.

Science!

And maybe it's because I don't watch any of the network news channels and stick to AP/Reuters/BBC World Service and here for my news and analysis, but the only people I see still using the word deplorable as a political epithet are solidly on the right and the ones frequently talking about attack by proxy.

If I say that I disagree with the color toilet paper Trump puts in the White House, a reasonable and healthy observer would realize I'm talking about the decision and not attempting to make them a victim. If I said I disagree with his appointment of DeVos as education chair, I'm disagree with him and not the reasonable and healthy supporter.

Stop trying to take bullets for the guy. It's just a forum, and you're not him. Any mature person would tell you directly if the problem is with you and your views. Step aside, separate, and realize it's not about you.
Ive done that before, I’ve told my two daughters that a singer wasn’t any good, and that they sucked, and the response wasn’t very good back to me. I watch Fox News, because it is the only way I go. I watch only the ones for Trump, and the ones that are against Trump can take a hike. I don’t see the right calling you on the left a deplorable, and if I was talking to you face to face, I’m not going to do that. The only way that will be done, is if someone from the left starts getting angry, then I’ll attack back. We’ve been attacked enough, and I think Trump supporters will stand up for him, and I’m not saying I take everything that you attack him for. It is just that we are going to defend him, in a lot of ways.
 
#86
#86
You should get smarter people for your side then . You keep losing to the ones you are calling ignorant. It’s a not looking good for the ones you think are smart .
You would be surprised at how many Former R's, Fiscal Conservatives, Libertarians, and Independents I get along with on here. They know who i'm talking about. You're in a cult, Bud.
 
#91
#91
How is that Mick? It’s true, when you attack Trump, you attack me, because I’m a Trumper. Isn’t that what the demos say? A deplorable?
Yes you are considered a deplorable. Either you believe the stuff you type or knowingly post garbage, neither is a good look.
 
#93
#93
You would be surprised at how many Former R's, Fiscal Conservatives, Libertarians, and Independents I get along with on here. They know who i'm talking about. You're in a cult, Bud.

Apparently you have a problem with self reflection if you keep say that others are the ignorant ones , and your party keeps losing to them . A smart person ( one would think ) after a while would stop hitting their own thumb with the hammer and expecting it not to hurt ... Bud
 
#94
#94
I want him to do well. We all need him to do well. I am worried about his mental state.
You’re simply buying into a media narrative that started in 2017.

Remember all that talk about removing Trump with the 25th amendment?

It’s a liberal talking point. Trump is sharper than all of the Dem candidates.
 
#98
#98
Apparently you have a problem with self reflection if you keep say that others are the ignorant ones , and your party keeps losing to them . A smart person ( one would think ) after a while would stop hitting their own thumb with the hammer and expecting it not to hurt ... Bud
You're ignorant if you believe Trump didn't seek election help twice. Whats your honest position on that or is there a but Hillary/Obama deflection coming from you?
 
You're ignorant if you believe Trump didn't seek election help twice. Whats your honest position on that or is there a but Hillary/Obama deflection coming from you?

Why would Trump , the most egotistical person you’ve ever seen , worry about getting help beating Joe Biden ? Now if you wanted to make the case that it would embarrass a former Obama VP and further try to erode Obamas time in office .. I’ll agree . I personally don’t think Trump likes Biden either .
 

VN Store



Back
Top