TrumPutinGate

[FLVOL69]

If he cans Mueller, he will instantly forfeit the presumption of innocence many of his supporters still afford him. He will become instantly more guilty in the eyes of his detractors. He knows this.

So if Trump cans Mueller with full knowledge of the fall out, it can only be viewed as his choice of the lesser of two evils. Meaning, the greater evil would be letting Mueller do his job. Meaning, he is terrified of what Mueller might uncover and would rather live with presumed guilt than proven guilt.

Except Mueller is not doing his job, he's doing opposition research for 2020 at the taxpayers expense, Trumpwon't allow this charade to continue indefinitely. Stop listening to partisan hacks and pundits telling you what is going to happen, haven't you learned your lesson after the last election?

 

[lawgator1]

He does have business interests all over the world. Would you be surprised to find funds from Russian, German, British ext banks have funded his projects? What would that prove anyway?

Depends on who they were with, how much was involved, and what the financiers got or expect in return. By all accounts, some of the people and institutions that are connected to these banks, especially Deutsch Bank, are not the most savory.

Mueller needs full access to their finances. If he is stonewalled by the administration on it, then I suspect that for many on the Senate committee in particular that will be the smoking gun that does Donny in.

Going to come down to whether the GOP puts party over country. My take right now is that there is a lot of uneasiness about Trump, what he says, and what he is doing. They are almost testing him with this bill on Russian sanctions and retaining the power to maintain or remove them in the Legislative branch.

If Donny gets cross-wise on them on that, all bets are off.

 

[golfballs]

I think this is part of the chain you are claiming I didn't read. But that's okay. Take the discussion in whatever direction suits your agenda, I'll try to follow.

LG was screeching about Kushner saying it's insulting to Trump supporters. Which I countered it is when you're crowing the patently false claim that Russia "hacked the election" and the man they chose is "illegitimate".

Luther, you need to go back to the kiddie pool. You can barely keep your head above water here.

 

[hog88]

Not a single person qualified their statement. It's certainly convenient to do so now. If I get really bored I may go back and find a few of the posts.

Please go back and look, I know for a fact that at least VB, GV and myself have.

 

[hog88]

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday night issued a subpoena to compel Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort’s presence at a public hearing Wednesday. “Mr. Manafort, through his attorney, said that he would be willing to provide only a single transcribed interview to Congress, which would not be available to the Judiciary Committee members or staff,” Senators Chuck Grassley and Dianne Feinstein said in a statement. Lawyers for Manafort had been negotiating to prevent him from testifying in public, but those talks appear to have broken down. Grassley and Feinstein said Manafort could still skirt a public hearing “if he would be willing to agree to production of documents and a transcribed interview.”

Congressional subpoena lol:

 

[lawgator1]

Judiciary Committee Issues Subpoena for Paul Manafort

Got a new t-shirt for Manafort.

 

[hog88]

Depends on who they were with, how much was involved, and what the financiers got or expect in return. By all accounts, some of the people and institutions that are connected to these banks, especially Deutsch Bank, are not the most savory.

Mueller needs full access to their finances. If he is stonewalled by the administration on it, then I suspect that for many on the Senate committee in particular that will be the smoking gun that does Donny in.

Going to come down to whether the GOP puts party over country. My take right now is that there is a lot of uneasiness about Trump, what he says, and what he is doing. They are almost testing him with this bill on Russian sanctions and retaining the power to maintain or remove them in the Legislative branch.

If Donny gets cross-wise on them on that, all bets are off.

Come on counselor, you know that before a reasonable judge would sign off on an order like that, Muller would have to show something indicating a quid-pro-quo arraignment or possible collusion.

And let's say there are some shady financial dealings in Trump's past, do we throw out the statute of limitations and allow Muller to go back 7, 8, 10 years in the search for something?

 

[volinbham]

Douchebag he is, no argument from me there.

none from me either.

however that doesn't make a bit of this Russia stuff true

 

[luthervol]

Except Mueller is not doing his job, he's doing opposition research for 2020 at the taxpayers expense, Trumpwon't allow this charade to continue indefinitely. Stop listening to partisan hacks and pundits telling you what is going to happen, haven't you learned your lesson after the last election?

I learned many lessons from the last election, as did most everyone else. There are still a couple of lessons yet to be learned. Mueller is helping to fill in the blanks so the lessons to be learned will be more clear for all. And that is what has Trump so terrified.

I do admire, in a way, your determination to stand by your man no matter what; it can't be easy.

 

[volinbham]

I learned many lessons from the last election, as did most everyone else. There are still a couple of lessons yet to be learned. Mueller is helping to fill in the blanks so the lessons to be learned will be more clear for all. And that is what has Trump so terrified.

I do admire, in a way, your determination to stand by your man no matter what; it can't be easy.

Would you be okay with Mueller level scrutiny on the eventual DNC nominee? Just curious.

Clearly there was enough evidence to have such an investigation on the prior one but given her team was in charge of making such decisions one did not materialize.

 

[luthervol]

LG was screeching about Kushner saying it's insulting to Trump supporters. Which I countered it is when you're crowing the patently false claim that Russia "hacked the election" and the man they chose is "illegitimate".

Luther, you need to go back to the kiddie pool. You can barely keep your head above water here.

I can handle the deep end. I'm wearing water wings.
Now if you can only learn to jump in without having to hold your nose.

 

[luthervol]

Would you be okay with Mueller level scrutiny on the eventual DNC nominee? Just curious.

Clearly there was enough evidence to have such an investigation on the prior one but given her team was in charge of making such decisions one did not materialize.

If that DNC nominee did as much as Trump has to cast doubt and suspicion on themselves, then yes. Most politicians are smart enough to not paint themselves into a corner with no exit strategy.

 

[hog88]

If that DNC nominee did as much as Trump has to cast doubt and suspicion on themselves, then yes. Most politicians are smart enough to not paint themselves into a corner with no exit strategy.

WUT? Please luther, don't try and tell us Clinton didn't cast doubt and suspicion on herself.

 

[GAVol]

My point is, Kushner doesn't have much credibility. His father is a convicted felon.

Such complete illogical BS.

 

[luthervol]

WUT? Please luther, don't try and tell us Clinton didn't cast doubt and suspicion on herself.

Some, but not nearly as much as trump. Your overindulgence and over-reliance on right wing media has greatly distorted your view of reality; especially with regards to the Clintons.

 

[volinbham]

If that DNC nominee did as much as Trump has to cast doubt and suspicion on themselves, then yes. Most politicians are smart enough to not paint themselves into a corner with no exit strategy.

having her staff destroy all the devices and hard drives isn't suspicious?

having about 10 different stories about why she used a private server isn't suspicious?

her foundation raking in millions from foreign companies and leaders while she's SoS and making decisions impacting said countries isn't suspicious? Same for her husband getting paid huge amounts for speeches to these same entities?

her comingling the foundation work with her SoS work by going so far has having her SoS assistant also be an employee of the foundation AND an employee of a lobbying arm wasn't suspicious?

just a partial list of suspicious behavior.

that said, I'm generally against Special Prosecutors for the very reason that they typically go in search of a crime rather than investigate one that is known to have occurred. I do not want law enforcement to do oppo research but that's typically what these things turn into.

 

[Grand Vol]

Some, but not nearly as much as trump. Your overindulgence and over-reliance on right wing media has greatly distorted your view of reality; especially with regards to the Clintons.

No, just no.

Take the partisan filters off for a moment and be objective.

 

[lawgator1]

Why does Trump fight this so hard? If there is nothing to it, why not just be an open book about it ?

He complains that it distracts from his agenda, but the man won't stop talking about it to try to shame people into giving up on it, firing people, or taking other actions that just draw everyone's attention right back to it.

If there's nothing to it, his approach just makes no sense, at all.

 

[volinbham]

Why does Trump fight this so hard? If there is nothing to it, why not just be an open book about it ?

He complains that it distracts from his agenda, but the man won't stop talking about it to try to shame people into giving up on it, firing people, or taking other actions that just draw everyone's attention right back to it.

If there's nothing to it, his approach just makes no sense, at all.

You would not fight an open ended investigation into all your activities?

Why did Dems resist an SP for Clinton? I mean if there was nothing there why not let the sunshine in. Why did they fight Ken Starr back when Bill was in charge?

You knew you weren't serious with the question but you posted it anyway.

 

[lawgator1]

having her staff destroy all the devices and hard drives isn't suspicious?

having about 10 different stories about why she used a private server isn't suspicious?

her foundation raking in millions from foreign companies and leaders while she's SoS and making decisions impacting said countries isn't suspicious? Same for her husband getting paid huge amounts for speeches to these same entities?

her comingling the foundation work with her SoS work by going so far has having her SoS assistant also be an employee of the foundation AND an employee of a lobbying arm wasn't suspicious?

just a partial list of suspicious behavior.

that said, I'm generally against Special Prosecutors for the very reason that they typically go in search of a crime rather than investigate one that is known to have occurred. I do not want law enforcement to do oppo research but that's typically what these things turn into.

No, just no.

Take the partisan filters off for a moment and be objective.

We can all agree that Clinton had a ton of baggage and was a deeply flawed candidate. It, more than anything, explains why Trump won.

But none of that has anything to do with whether Trump can effectively govern given the circumstances, and, even if you don't think he did anything wrong, you have to admit that there is such a pall over his administration by how he has reacted that its tough for even the GOP in Congress to take him very seriously.

 

[lawgator1]

You would not fight an open ended investigation into all your activities?

Why did Dems resist an SP for Clinton? I mean if there was nothing there why not let the sunshine in. Why did they fight Ken Starr back when Bill was in charge?

You knew you weren't serious with the question but you posted it anyway.

Because another Clinton scandal investigation, instituted by Republicans trying to undermine them, just seemed so ... pointless. So trite at this point.

The investigations now are all coming from Republicans, in one form or another.

 

[Grand Vol]

We can all agree that Clinton had a ton of baggage and was a deeply flawed candidate. It, more than anything, explains why Trump won.

Wow! Huge step for you.

 

[lawgator1]

Wow! Huge step for you.

Can you agree with this?

 

[Grand Vol]

Can you agree with this?

 

[volinbham]

We can all agree that Clinton had a ton of baggage and was a deeply flawed candidate. It, more than anything, explains why Trump won.

But none of that has anything to do with whether Trump can effectively govern given the circumstances, and, even if you don't think he did anything wrong, you have to admit that there is such a pall over his administration by how he has reacted that its tough for even the GOP in Congress to take him very seriously.

I think he sucks, totally sucks.

However, I hate (and fear) the criminalization of politics. Regardless of how bad he sucks I will never condone him being forced out of office on bogus charges or open-end investigations to find something/anything to "get him".

He was elected fairly. He'll be gone soon enough. We lose our national soul if we abandon our principles just to get rid of him.