Official Special Investigation Into Trump Thread

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

FalloutJack:
Can we just cancel the entire Trump administration, throw in Hillary, and go complain about her for a while? Seriouly, there'd be less shit on the ground and we'd groan alot less.

I second this. At least the "but Hilary..." arguments would be actually relevant.

CaitSeith:

FalloutJack:
Can we just cancel the entire Trump administration, throw in Hillary, and go complain about her for a while? Seriouly, there'd be less shit on the ground and we'd groan alot less.

I second this. At least the "but Hilary..." arguments would be actually relevant.

It's all I flipping see lately from those defending Trump and his family.

"But if Hillary was president..."

"But if Hillary met with Russians..."

"But if Bill was in office..."

THEY FUCKING ARENT!! Trump is in power. HE is in power. HIS family are doing the dumb shit. I am sick and tired of people trying to pass the blame to someone else when were caught stabbing the victim and even confessed to doing so.

Take responsibility for your won shit.

FalloutJack:
Can we just cancel the entire Trump administration, throw in Hillary, and go complain about her for a while? Seriouly, there'd be less shit on the ground and we'd groan alot less.

While I'm all for it, this would almost certainly throw the US into a second civil war, while the Republicans double down on the obstructionism.

This is awesome.

A Russian-American lobbyist, who is also a former Soviet military officer, was in the room during a June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer, according to multiple reports.

Rinat Akhmetshin participated in the meeting, he confirmed to The Associated Press on Friday after NBC News first reported that a Russian-American lobbyist was present when Trump Jr. met with Natalia Veselnitskaya.

?I never thought this would be such a big deal, to be honest,? Akhmetshin told the AP.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/donald-trump-jr-counterintelligence-russia_us_5968a98ae4b0d6341fe810e9

Edit...
Even better.

The alleged former Soviet intelligence officer who attended the now-infamous meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and other top campaign officials last June was previously accused in federal and state courts of orchestrating an international hacking conspiracy.
Akhmetshin, who had been hired by Veselnitskaya to help with pro-Russian lobbying efforts in Washington, said the Russian lawyer brought a folder of documents to the meeting, which he thinks she left at Trump Tower.
He said the print-outs detailed an alleged flow of illicit funds to the Democratic National Committee. According to Akhmetshin, Trump Jr. asked whether the lawyer had all the evidence to back up her claims and Veselnitskaya said the Trump campaign would have to do further research themselves.
In court papers filed with the New York Supreme Court in November 2015, Akhmetshin was described as "a former Soviet military counterintelligence officer" by lawyers for International Mineral Resources (IMR), a Russian mining company that alleged it had been hacked.
Those documents accuse Akhmetshin of hacking into two computer systems and stealing sensitive and confidential materials as part of an alleged black-ops smear campaign against IMR. The allegations were later withdrawn.
The U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. was told in July 2015 that Akhmetshin had arranged the hacking of a mining company's private records-stealing internal documents and then disseminating them. The corporate-espionage case was brought by IMR, which alleged that Akhmetshin was hired by a law firm representing a fertilizer producer company called Eurochem.
A New York law firm paid Akhmetshin $140,000, including expenses, to organize a public-relations campaign targeting IMR. Shortly after he began that work, IMR suffered a sophisticated and systematic breach of its computers, and gigabytes of data allegedly stolen in the breach wound up the hands of journalists and human-rights groups critical of the mining company. IMR accused Akhmetshin of paying Russian hackers to carry out the attack.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-team-met-russian-accused-of-international-hacking-conspiracy

Kwak:
This is awesome.

Edit...
Even better.

... Even Better.

Beginning of the Article:
A man who says he is a previously unreported attendee of the controversial meeting in June 2016 between top Trump campaign advisers and a Russian lawyer said the attorney presented the men with documents.

Rinat Akhmetshin, a Russian-American lobbyist who served in the Soviet military, told The Associated Press on Friday that the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, presented documents that she believed detailed the flow of illicit funds to the Democratic National Committee.

In Akhmetshin's recounting, Veselnitskaya suggested to those in the meeting ? including Donald Trump Jr.; President Donald Trump's campaign chairman at the time, Paul Manafort; and Jared Kushner, who's now a White House senior adviser ? that they make the contents of the documents public. She said that doing so could help Trump's campaign, Akhmetshin said.

"This could be a good issue to expose how the DNC is accepting bad money," he recalled her saying.

Akhmetshin said Trump Jr. then asked whether she had evidence to back up the assertion, to which Veselnitskaya said the campaign would have to do more research on the subject. That's when Trump Jr. lost interest, Akhmetshin said.

"They couldn't wait for the meeting to end," he said, adding that he believes she left the documents with the Trump associates but that it was unclear whether she handed the documents to one of the three men or left them in the room.

Akhmetshin told the AP he did not know whether the documents were provided by the Russian government.

Dr. Thrax:

FalloutJack:
Can we just cancel the entire Trump administration, throw in Hillary, and go complain about her for a while? Seriouly, there'd be less shit on the ground and we'd groan alot less.

While I'm all for it, this would almost certainly throw the US into a second civil war, while the Republicans double down on the obstructionism.

If we're not having a civil war NOW, we're not having a civil war. Nothing she could do could possibly be dumber or more disastrous, which is why more people STILL voted for her.

FalloutJack:
If we're not having a civil war NOW, we're not having a civil war. Nothing she could do could possibly be dumber or more disastrous, which is why more people STILL voted for her.

Why would we be having a civil war now?
And the very act of forcing Trump's administration out and replacing it with Hillary would be the thing that would spark civil war. Trump's "2nd amendment people" would stop talking about how they're going to "take back their government" and actually try to do it for once.

Kwak:
This is awesome.

It's not really awesome if you think about it. The fact that this is all true, and that the entire Republican party is aware of it and not only are they not doing anything to stop it, they're trying to downplay it, means that they've gone rogue. In a two party system there's now a treasonous political party and they're in charge. In a sane country they would all get the noose or face the firing squad. That's how serious this situation is and most people don't even realize it because even the media is downplaying it.

Dr. Thrax:
Snip

My god, is that where you thought I was going with my offhand comment? No, I think a new legal precident should be formed, sort of the US-equivalent of a 'Get Out Of Brexit Free' Card. And as for those hardliners who still think this nutcase is a good idea, they're all completely delusional. There's no nice way to put it. Anyone not having second thoughts should be having their head examined. At any rate, no, civil wars aren't going to happen. It didn't happen when the Human Middle Finger was put into power. It didn't happen when a black president was elected (for two terms). It didn't happen on any of the times Texas wanted to secede from the union. It won't happen for another reason. Events have taught me thus. They won't commit.

Adam Jensen:

Kwak:
This is awesome.

It's not really awesome if you think about it. The fact that this is all true, and that the entire Republican party is aware of it and not only are they not doing anything to stop it, they're trying to downplay it, means that they've gone rogue. In a two party system there's now a treasonous political party and they're in charge. In a sane country they would all get the noose or face the firing squad. That's how serious this situation is and most people don't even realize it because even the media is downplaying it.

Let's not talk about nooses and firing squads just yet. I agree with your basic assesment that the Republican Party has been subverted by what's effectively a fascist movement and that it's attempting to undermine american democracy but it's too large to accuse every single member of being in on it. It's more apt to say that there is a significant fraction within the party that has obviously turned against the american people and that they should be tried for treason but it'd be unfair to ignore that not everyone on the lower level is supporting those. I think the party could reform under some of its more moderate members if Trump and his base of supporters were removed and tried for their crimes against the american people. Of course as a european talk about capital punishment kinda scares me, on the other hand it's not like I want Trump or Bannon to become a sort of Nelson Mandela figure for the far right.

A dang, I better stop now, I feel vaguely dirty sharing my filthy leftist wet dreams with a forum full of strangers.

PsychedelicDiamond:
Let's not talk about nooses and firing squads just yet. I agree with your basic assesment that the Republican Party has been subverted by what's effectively a fascist movement and that it's attempting to undermine american democracy but it's too large to accuse every single member of being in on it. It's more apt to say that there is a significant fraction within the party that has obviously turned against the american people and that they should be tried for treason but it'd be unfair to ignore that not everyone on the lower level is supporting those. I think the party could reform under some of its more moderate members if Trump and his base of supporters were removed and tried for their crimes against the american people. Of course as a european talk about capital punishment kinda scares me, on the other hand it's not like I want Trump or Bannon to become a sort of Nelson Mandela figure for the far right.

A dang, I better stop now, I feel vaguely dirty sharing my filthy leftist wet dreams with a forum full of strangers.

I'm not saying that I'm in favor of hanging or firing squads. I'm saying that that is what happens to people who commit such crimes in functional democracies. I'd be perfectly fine with some prison time and the end of their political careers. And I also wasn't talking about the entire Republican party, I was talking about everyone who's enabling this. Some of them like Lindsey Graham (I was really pleasantly surprised, actually) and John McCain aren't sitting idly.

Adam Jensen:
And I also wasn't talking about the entire Republican party, I was talking about everyone who's enabling this. Some of them like Lindsey Graham (I was really pleasantly surprised, actually) and John McCain aren't sitting idly.

Graham and McCain, whatever else you may have to say about them, have been in the halls of power long enough to know how the game is played. They've also been on the receiving end of Trump's abuse more than once and are fully aware of what his word is worth, that he demands absolute loyalty but never reciprocates. And they probably share our suspicions that Trump is suffering from Alzheimer's, dementia, tertiary syphilis, or some combination thereof.

Adam Jensen:

PsychedelicDiamond:
Let's not talk about nooses and firing squads just yet. I agree with your basic assesment that the Republican Party has been subverted by what's effectively a fascist movement and that it's attempting to undermine american democracy but it's too large to accuse every single member of being in on it. It's more apt to say that there is a significant fraction within the party that has obviously turned against the american people and that they should be tried for treason but it'd be unfair to ignore that not everyone on the lower level is supporting those. I think the party could reform under some of its more moderate members if Trump and his base of supporters were removed and tried for their crimes against the american people. Of course as a european talk about capital punishment kinda scares me, on the other hand it's not like I want Trump or Bannon to become a sort of Nelson Mandela figure for the far right.

A dang, I better stop now, I feel vaguely dirty sharing my filthy leftist wet dreams with a forum full of strangers.

I'm not saying that I'm in favor of hanging or firing squads. I'm saying that that is what happens to people who commit such crimes in functional democracies. I'd be perfectly fine with some prison time and the end of their political careers. And I also wasn't talking about the entire Republican party, I was talking about everyone who's enabling this. Some of them like Lindsey Graham (I was really pleasantly surprised, actually) and John McCain aren't sitting idly.

Prison time and of course a hefty fine to cover the additional issues of abusing political position for financial gain in violation of the emoluments clause. Confiscation of such assets that benefited from this such as say, All of his clubs, Hotels, casinos, Trump tower, and any merchandise profits may suffice to deter such an attempt by vultures that would be willing to prey upon the public offices of the US in the future. If he loses everything he owns that benefited from his abuse of public office, that should make anyone else considering such to change their minds.

I think they should make a strong example of him to make sure the message is sent loud and clear that such a breach of public trust will never be tolerated again. Liquidating such assets for immediate sale and adding it to tax revenue should suffice as a proper deterrent.

Adam Jensen:

Kwak:
This is awesome.

It's not really awesome if you think about it. The fact that this is all true, and that the entire Republican party is aware of it and not only are they not doing anything to stop it, they're trying to downplay it, means that they've gone rogue. In a two party system there's now a treasonous political party and they're in charge. In a sane country they would all get the noose or face the firing squad. That's how serious this situation is and most people don't even realize it because even the media is downplaying it.

The people voted for this "treasonous political party", both in Congress and as president. Trump didn't arrive into office by coup or legal technicality, but by running and winning an election on his own hook. Voters knew that Trump had ties to Russia, knew of his affinity for Vladimir Putin, and chose him anyway.

Treason is explicitly defined in the Constitution because the word "treason" is used an excuse to justify all sorts of otherwise appalling behavior, such as removing a democratically elected leader by force and destroying an entire class of people. Everything becomes an emergency and nothing can wait for due process because TREASON!

In a sane country there would be lengthy investigations in which the accused are given the full benefit of the doubt. Sane countries place great stock in rights and proper procedure. It's the insane ones that hasten to destroy every supposed demon that can be blamed for the day's ills.

Veylon:

The people voted-

-Democrat, according to the numbers. Not by much, but they did. The Electoral College was swayed by the various issues. The call was actually down to a very few people. As FOR those voters, it is still a case where a number of them were taken in by promises that could not be kept, or that they made erronius assumptions about, and that others voted for Trump for reasons of spite and yolo. More trolls, basically. Not to say that the fanatics you speak of are not still a large chunk, but between all that I've said, plus those who didn't/couldn't vote and those that voted Independent, it would be inaccurate to call them 'The People'. They do not represent the most of the United States. Please adjust your statements accordingly.

Veylon:

Adam Jensen:

Kwak:
This is awesome.

It's not really awesome if you think about it. The fact that this is all true, and that the entire Republican party is aware of it and not only are they not doing anything to stop it, they're trying to downplay it, means that they've gone rogue. In a two party system there's now a treasonous political party and they're in charge. In a sane country they would all get the noose or face the firing squad. That's how serious this situation is and most people don't even realize it because even the media is downplaying it.

The people voted for this "treasonous political party", both in Congress and as president. Trump didn't arrive into office by coup or legal technicality, but by running and winning an election on his own hook. Voters knew that Trump had ties to Russia, knew of his affinity for Vladimir Putin, and chose him anyway.

Treason is explicitly defined in the Constitution because the word "treason" is used an excuse to justify all sorts of otherwise appalling behavior, such as removing a democratically elected leader by force and destroying an entire class of people. Everything becomes an emergency and nothing can wait for due process because TREASON!

In a sane country there would be lengthy investigations in which the accused are given the full benefit of the doubt. Sane countries place great stock in rights and proper procedure. It's the insane ones that hasten to destroy every supposed demon that can be blamed for the day's ills.

SO what sane country hands over the highest possible level of security of their nation to a "Foreign Agent" on Russia's Payroll that was already canned prior to Trump hiring him in the first place, then lets the guy who did not even receive the majority of the votes then fire all of those investigating Russia's involvement and who has openly stated he was intentionally interfering with that investigation because he wants it immediately stopped, and was already breaking the law from the day he was sworn into office due to the worst violation of the emoluments clause in the Nation's history?

People thinking Trump wanted to improve relations with Russia does not mean that they understood that his campaign chair was on Russia's payroll for just helping hand the Ukraine election over to a guy who up and actually gave part of their country to Russia. Most people in the US had no idea what had just happened in the Ukraine. They were not aware that Russia had ran a Blitz fake news propaganda campaign, attempted hacking,and coordination with people inside the Ukraine to do so, the EXACT same group that was responsible for interference with US elections. When we have US and allied intelligence all telling us the exact same thing and are currently investigating exactly all of what happened and who was involved, it is reasonable to want to make sure they get to the bottom of exactly what happened with who and where.

No, No sane nation is just going to ignore this and allow him to disrupt the investigation, especially when his staff has repeatdly lied to gain their security clearance and the investigations not only involve him and his appointees and staff, but his own family as well.

So now we have Trump coming out and saying he only appointed Sessions to have sessions interfere with the Russia investigation? Go figure..
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/us/politics/trump-interview-sessions-russia.html

Seriously, he has already admitted that he fired people because he didn't want them contusing the Russia investigation, then he said he hired people just to stop it. Just when you thought his obstruction of justice could not be any plainer.

IN addition, in case anyone missed it, the Russians in the room at Jr.'s party were a money launderer and the other Russian,
a former counterintelligence officer claims they gave Jr a file on Clinton at the meeting...
http://www.businessinsider.com/rinat-akhmetshin-trump-jr-meeting-russia-documents-2017-7

This is addition to the news that Trump's campaign chair who was also at the meeting, was not only on Russia's payroll, but in debt to Russians for $17 million.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/us/politics/paul-manafort-russia-trump.html

ALSO the guy who set up the meeting with Jr apparently was involved with the whole Trump Tower in Moscow deal from 2013
https://www.rt.com/business/trump-plan-skyscraper-russia-479/
http://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-rob-goldstone-donald-trump-jr-russia-2017-7

Honestly, With as simpleminded as trump is he very well may have run for president just so he could build a Tower in Moscow. If he is president he can lift the sanctions and bam he gets his tower. Then people kept nosing in to his Russian business so he fires all of them and thinks he solved it until little things like ethics and laws start to get in the way. Seriously if that is what it turns out to be I would not even be surprised. He does not see anything wrong with hacking, lying, scamming, abuse of power,stealing, breaking laws, endangering Americans due to the fact that he has no Ethics what so ever.

Lil devils x:

SO what sane country hands over the highest possible level of security of their nation to a "Foreign Agent" on Russia's Payroll that was already canned prior to Trump hiring him in the first place, then lets the guy who did not even receive the majority of the votes then fire all of those investigating Russia's involvement

You're going to need to name me some names. Comey himself wasn't investigating.

Lil devils x:
and who has openly stated he was intentionally interfering with that investigation because he wants it immediately stopped, and was already breaking the law from the day he was sworn into office due to the worst violation of the emoluments clause in the Nation's history?

Ours, apparently. Unless and until we have another Constitutional Convention to do away with the Electoral College, that's the law of the land. The verdict on Trump's alleged crimes will ultimately be decided by Congress.

Lil devils x:
People thinking Trump wanted to improve relations with Russia does not mean that they understood that his campaign chair was on Russia's payroll for just helping hand the Ukraine election over to a guy who up and actually gave part of their country to Russia. Most people in the US had no idea what had just happened in the Ukraine. They were not aware that Russia had ran a Blitz fake news propaganda campaign, attempted hacking,and coordination with people inside the Ukraine to do so, the EXACT same group that was responsible for interference with US elections. When we have US and allied intelligence all telling us the exact same thing and are currently investigating exactly all of what happened and who was involved, it is reasonable to want to make sure they get to the bottom of exactly what happened with who and where.

Your first argument is that voters are dumb/ignorant and that their votes should therefor bear little weight.
Your second argument is we should instead listen to the guys who led us on the WMD wild goose chase in Iraq.

Lil devils x:
No, No sane nation is just going to ignore this and allow him to disrupt the investigation, especially when his staff has repeatdly lied to gain their security clearance and the investigations not only involve him and his appointees and staff, but his own family as well.

The investigation is on and has been on regardless him firing the FBI chief. Congress even dredged up Mueller to create a blue ribbon panel of additional investigating.

Again, this is a sane country. This isn't the USSR where anyone vaguely suspicious-looking is rounded up and sent to the gulag to satisfy someone's impatience to "Do Something!" The charges against Trump & co. are very serious and need to be taken very seriously. If there's High Crimes and Misdemeanors to hold the gang accountable for, they need to be clear and certain and without a shadow of a doubt. Trump will be gone in four (or, God help us, eight) years, but the precedence about what Congress does with or to him lasts forever. If they make up a bunch of rules of convenience that lets them kick him out today, those rules will still be around for the next president that you won't want kicked out. If it were easy to ditch presidents, Obama would've been gone and replaced by Paul Ryan ages ago. I'm not sure I'd want that sort of thing to happen.

And, in any case, even if Trump were kicked out today, that leaves you with President Pence. If you could get rid of Trump, would you really want to, knowing the alternative? I'm not so sure I would.

Veylon:

Lil devils x:

SO what sane country hands over the highest possible level of security of their nation to a "Foreign Agent" on Russia's Payroll that was already canned prior to Trump hiring him in the first place, then lets the guy who did not even receive the majority of the votes then fire all of those investigating Russia's involvement

You're going to need to name me some names. Comey himself wasn't investigating.

Lil devils x:
and who has openly stated he was intentionally interfering with that investigation because he wants it immediately stopped, and was already breaking the law from the day he was sworn into office due to the worst violation of the emoluments clause in the Nation's history?

Ours, apparently. Unless and until we have another Constitutional Convention to do away with the Electoral College, that's the law of the land. The verdict on Trump's alleged crimes will ultimately be decided by Congress.

Lil devils x:
People thinking Trump wanted to improve relations with Russia does not mean that they understood that his campaign chair was on Russia's payroll for just helping hand the Ukraine election over to a guy who up and actually gave part of their country to Russia. Most people in the US had no idea what had just happened in the Ukraine. They were not aware that Russia had ran a Blitz fake news propaganda campaign, attempted hacking,and coordination with people inside the Ukraine to do so, the EXACT same group that was responsible for interference with US elections. When we have US and allied intelligence all telling us the exact same thing and are currently investigating exactly all of what happened and who was involved, it is reasonable to want to make sure they get to the bottom of exactly what happened with who and where.

Your first argument is that voters are dumb/ignorant and that their votes should therefor bear little weight.
Your second argument is we should instead listen to the guys who led us on the WMD wild goose chase in Iraq.

Lil devils x:
No, No sane nation is just going to ignore this and allow him to disrupt the investigation, especially when his staff has repeatdly lied to gain their security clearance and the investigations not only involve him and his appointees and staff, but his own family as well.

The investigation is on and has been on regardless him firing the FBI chief. Congress even dredged up Mueller to create a blue ribbon panel of additional investigating.

Again, this is a sane country. This isn't the USSR where anyone vaguely suspicious-looking is rounded up and sent to the gulag to satisfy someone's impatience to "Do Something!" The charges against Trump & co. are very serious and need to be taken very seriously. If there's High Crimes and Misdemeanors to hold the gang accountable for, they need to be clear and certain and without a shadow of a doubt. Trump will be gone in four (or, God help us, eight) years, but the precedence about what Congress does with or to him lasts forever. If they make up a bunch of rules of convenience that lets them kick him out today, those rules will still be around for the next president that you won't want kicked out. If it were easy to ditch presidents, Obama would've been gone and replaced by Paul Ryan ages ago. I'm not sure I'd want that sort of thing to happen.

And, in any case, even if Trump were kicked out today, that leaves you with President Pence. If you could get rid of Trump, would you really want to, knowing the alternative? I'm not so sure I would.

I have made it pretty clear on here that I am worried Pence may be worse than Trump in many regards, and have honestly hoped they would postpone impeachment. I have expressed that concern repeatedly here as well. We are in a screwed if we do and a screwed if we don't situation. I stated from the beginning that Pence was Trump's insurance policy from the day he was announced as his VP.

1)One of the first things Trump did was try to replace all of those who would be handling the Russia investigation with his yes men. When he fired the acting attorney general and 46 attorneys and replaced them with Sessions and his people, he has now stated he put Sessions in charge to take care of the Russia investigation. When he fired Comey, he gave an interview stating he was thinking of the Russia investigation at that time and once a special prosecutor was appointed, he did not even know who he would put in charge of the FBI anymore because the only reason he was doing it in the first place was to kill the Russia investigation. Even after Nunes recused himself from the Russia investigation, He as still pressuring Nunes to interfere. He had people coming to him about information INSTEAD of to the committee that was investigating.

Trump did not just interfere with the FBI, he was interfering with the congressional panels investigating as well as trying to stack the deck at the attorney generals office. He even tried to throw Rod Rosenstein under the bus again after he appointed the special counsel.

We are not talking about vaguely suspicious. We are talking about having a campaign chair who just helped Russia take over part of an allied nation. We are talking about appointing a " foreign agent" to head up national security. We are talking about Trump Jr being given a file a Russian counterintelligence officer claims had information obtained by spying on US officials. We are talking about numerous appointees LYING on their security clearance. Seriously.. there is much more than vaguely "suspicious" about that.
What is vague about any of that?

2) Yes, Impeachment, or even crimes after the fact may be brought against him the second his " yes men" lose control.

3)Voters were not made aware of most of what was happening due to US media not covering it. I have spoken to quite a few who never heard about Russia/ Ukraine/ Manafort/ Flynn until after Trump was in office for the first time. Many areas are very limited in the Chanel they receive in the US and most did not covered it. Them being unaware of what had happened is due to lack of coverage. I was aware due to reading European news, not from US news. US news at the time covered garbage for the most part, but I am sure people are not really surprised by that. I see voters as a victims, rather than " less weight". They were scammed by more than one source here. Trump scammed them the same way he scammed students out of their college money for a fake scam school. The same way he scammed small businesses out of their livelihoods. Trump has been scamming people a long time here, people were under the idea that he had to have been " vetted" to even be able to be in the Republican Primary. People actually believed that there were fail-safes here that did not really exist.

The thing is due to the Many issues with Trump, I do felt the electoral college did fail the people this time, as they did not even consider Trumps violations and security issues when deciding to call it the way they did. What they showed from this is that the US needs to have more safety's in place to prevent the nation from being taken over by a criminal organization or foreign government. When you have his own party in congress trying to limit his powers due to being worried about his competency, we have very serious issues that need to be addressed. The most serious issue here is that the Office of the President is designed to be held by the one person you trust with the lives of everyone more than anyone else and not an incompetent buffoon. Although he is not even doing his job, and instead telling the military to run themselves, he is actually supposed to be the head of the military, and like presidents before him actually direct them himself, but since he is clueless on how to do that, he just put someone in charge and put them on autodrive without him because he could not understand what it was they were telling him.

During his transition, Trump skipped the pentagon security briefings and they could not put them into bullet points for him so he did not even understand what they were telling him. He fired the guy who was supposed to secure his phone. He is STILL using an unencrypted email for official business. If the man cannot understand the job, he is certainly not fit to have it. He chose to just put someone everyone else told him was competent in charge instead of do his job himself. He seemed to be focused more on trying to take out anyone who could prosecute him or draw attention to the Russia issues rather than what the President of the US is actually supposed to do. His primary job is to be commander in chief of the military. It appears even his own party does not want him doing that, and would probably feel better if he lost his nuclear codes at this point.

Yes, I am stating the Electoral college has failed the people and the Voters were deceived and are continuing to be deceived by Trump. Trump has been screaming " fake news" and "move on from Russia" for some time now, and much of the conservative media has been ignoring what is happening or trying to make it sound better than it is. Yes, that is a disservice to the public, and to have a president that lies just about every time he speaks is frightening tbh. What happens when we have an actual crisis and he refuses to acknowledge the Truth? He actually gave press credentials to a whack job that told people Clinton was running a child abduction ring in a pizza parlor basement, that told people NASA was filing fake moon landings and Sandy Hooks children are not really dead. Yes, the system has failed at this point and they need to prevent someone like that from ever getting their hands on the nuclear codes again.

Jux:
Trump has asked his advisers about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself in connection with the probe, according to one of those people. A second person said Trump's lawyers have been discussing the president's pardoning powers among themselves.

Want to know why I support and am okay with riots? Because this is why I support and am okay with riots. Because peaceful protests would do absolutely nothing to remove Trump and his entire administration (Including Pence) from the Executive Branch of government, especially since the Republican Party supports such authoritarian dictatorial thinking. Not just riots, but riots in red states. Riots in red cities and towns. Show the Trump supporting politicians that their dictatorial aspirations are no longer safe to implement.

Peaceful protesting in the United States of America is a joke and no one from any political group listens to them. Haven't for 20 years now. If Trump does pardon himself and his administration, it must be show in fire and rage that what he did (and what his supporters in office enabled) will not be acceptable at all costs.

InsanityRequiem:

Jux:
Trump has asked his advisers about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself in connection with the probe, according to one of those people. A second person said Trump's lawyers have been discussing the president's pardoning powers among themselves.

Want to know why I support and am okay with riots? Because this is why I support and am okay with riots. Because peaceful protests would do absolutely nothing to remove Trump and his entire administration (Including Pence) from the Executive Branch of government, especially since the Republican Party supports such authoritarian dictatorial thinking. Not just riots, but riots in red states. Riots in red cities and towns. Show the Trump supporting politicians that their dictatorial aspirations are no longer safe to implement.

Peaceful protesting in the United States of America is a joke and no one from any political group listens to them. Haven?t for 20 years now. If Trump does pardon himself and his administration, it must be show in fire and rage that what he did (and what his supporters in office enabled) will not be acceptable at all costs.

See now as long as it is just Trumps and Pence's things they are burning up and damaging I would not mind that. It is when they damage things from people who didn't do this... See now if they burn down Trump tower, I honestly would not mind so much, it is an eyesore to begin with, now if they destroy some guys dry cleaners or some bakery or store.. that is just messed up. What did they do to deserve that?

The President cannot pardon impeachment. If he is impeached then prosecuted for any crimes, he would not be able to issue a pardon after the fact. He may attempt to pardon himself before the fact, but This very well could result in passing of laws to prevent his entire debacle.

I copied this from the comments section in a news story about the Trump lawyers investigating the details of Presidential Pardons. It's a real winner. :)

A short history of ONE small aspect of this mess, the June 9th meeting :
1. It did NOT happen
2. OK it happened but we talked about adoption
3. OK it was about Clinton, as the email said, but there was NO collusion
4. OK there may have been collusion, but it's NOT a crime
5. I knew NOTHING about it until I read it in the papers
6. OK maybe someone mentioned it in passing a while back
7. There were 4 people at the meeting (that we said didn't happen)
8. OK there were 5 people at the meeting that we said didn't happen
9. OK there were 8 people at the meeting that didn't happen, but they were all private citizens.
10. OK one of the people at the meeting had been in contact with the Russian state prosecutor, by her own admission. all the rest, private citizens.
11. Private citizens who had NOTHING to do with Hacking.
12. OK The alleged former Soviet intelligence officer who attended the meeting with top campaign officials last June was previously accused in federal and state courts of orchestrating an international hacking conspiracy. Akhmetshin told the Associated Press on Friday he accompanied Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya to the June 9, 2016, meeting with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort.
13. So what? "Could'a been China" doing the hacking. It's not like I had ANY connection to anyone at the meeting.
14. OK the eighth person at the meeting was Ike Kaveladze, is an executive at a Moscow-based property firm owned by Aras Agalarov, a business associate of mine accused of 1.4 billion in money laundering
15. OK My business partner sent a representative from Russia, but it was just "politics as usual" except with a foreign government which ISN'T illegal.
16. OK it's illegal, but WHAT ABOUT HILLARY?
17. How do pardons work?

He is done. Mueller is looking into his finances and he will probably get his tax returns. You know, the one thing that he continuously refuses to provide despite promising to release them? HE.IS.DONE. And he'll be lucky if he doesn't get thrown into prison with the rest of his cohorts.

And by the way, Trump didn't just become a criminal overnight. He's always been a criminal. If you ever find yourself in New York just talk to someone who lived there since the 80's. Pretty much every older New Yorker KNOWS that Trump was DEEP in with the Italian mafia. He did business with them all the time. For fuck sake he laundered their money. People voted for a criminal who laundered money for the Italian fuckin' mafia, and they still defend the guy! And he most likely did the same for the Russians. The guy is scum. A literal sociopathic criminal and a traitor to boot.

Lil devils x:
He may attempt to pardon himself before the fact, but This very well could result in passing of laws to prevent his entire debacle.

He can't pardon himself before the fact because there's nothing to pardon. You have to be indicted first. And when that happens we're already in impeachment territory so he can't do it then either. My best guess: he'll offer to resign peacefully and avoid the drama. Other Republicans might pressure him to resign as well.

Basement Cat:
I copied this from the comments section in a news story about the Trump lawyers investigating the details of Presidential Pardons. It's a real winner. :)

A short history of ONE small aspect of this mess, the June 9th meeting :
1. It did NOT happen
2. OK it happened but we talked about adoption
3. OK it was about Clinton, as the email said, but there was NO collusion
4. OK there may have been collusion, but it's NOT a crime
5. I knew NOTHING about it until I read it in the papers
6. OK maybe someone mentioned it in passing a while back
7. There were 4 people at the meeting (that we said didn't happen)
8. OK there were 5 people at the meeting that we said didn't happen
9. OK there were 8 people at the meeting that didn't happen, but they were all private citizens.
10. OK one of the people at the meeting had been in contact with the Russian state prosecutor, by her own admission. all the rest, private citizens.
11. Private citizens who had NOTHING to do with Hacking.
12. OK The alleged former Soviet intelligence officer who attended the meeting with top campaign officials last June was previously accused in federal and state courts of orchestrating an international hacking conspiracy. Akhmetshin told the Associated Press on Friday he accompanied Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya to the June 9, 2016, meeting with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort.
13. So what? "Could'a been China" doing the hacking. It's not like I had ANY connection to anyone at the meeting.
14. OK the eighth person at the meeting was Ike Kaveladze, is an executive at a Moscow-based property firm owned by Aras Agalarov, a business associate of mine accused of 1.4 billion in money laundering
15. OK My business partner sent a representative from Russia, but it was just "politics as usual" except with a foreign government which ISN'T illegal.
16. OK it's illegal, but WHAT ABOUT HILLARY?
17. How do pardons work?

Looks like Trump didn't read the '101 Things Skippy Isn't Allowed To Do In Politics' primer.[1]

[1] Not sure if that's a real thing, but it clearly should be.

FalloutJack:

Basement Cat:
I copied this from the comments section in a news story about the Trump lawyers investigating the details of Presidential Pardons. It's a real winner. :)

A short history of ONE small aspect of this mess, the June 9th meeting :
1. It did NOT happen
2. OK it happened but we talked about adoption
3. OK it was about Clinton, as the email said, but there was NO collusion
4. OK there may have been collusion, but it's NOT a crime
5. I knew NOTHING about it until I read it in the papers
6. OK maybe someone mentioned it in passing a while back
7. There were 4 people at the meeting (that we said didn't happen)
8. OK there were 5 people at the meeting that we said didn't happen
9. OK there were 8 people at the meeting that didn't happen, but they were all private citizens.
10. OK one of the people at the meeting had been in contact with the Russian state prosecutor, by her own admission. all the rest, private citizens.
11. Private citizens who had NOTHING to do with Hacking.
12. OK The alleged former Soviet intelligence officer who attended the meeting with top campaign officials last June was previously accused in federal and state courts of orchestrating an international hacking conspiracy. Akhmetshin told the Associated Press on Friday he accompanied Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya to the June 9, 2016, meeting with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort.
13. So what? "Could'a been China" doing the hacking. It's not like I had ANY connection to anyone at the meeting.
14. OK the eighth person at the meeting was Ike Kaveladze, is an executive at a Moscow-based property firm owned by Aras Agalarov, a business associate of mine accused of 1.4 billion in money laundering
15. OK My business partner sent a representative from Russia, but it was just "politics as usual" except with a foreign government which ISN'T illegal.
16. OK it's illegal, but WHAT ABOUT HILLARY?
17. How do pardons work?

Looks like Trump didn't read the '101 Things Skippy Isn't Allowed To Do In Politics' primer.[1]

101 is too high for him to count. Shiny things outside the window would distract him by #4.

[1] Not sure if that's a real thing, but it clearly should be.

Adam Jensen:
He can't pardon himself before the fact because there's nothing to pardon. You have to be indicted first. And when that happens we're already in impeachment territory so he can't do it then either. My best guess: he'll offer to resign peacefully and avoid the drama. Other Republicans might pressure him to resign as well.

Unfortunately, that's not quite true. A pardon can be granted for any offense already committed regardless of if any indictment or conviction exists.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/05/opinion/l-constitution-allows-pardons-before-conviction-590688.html:
In Murphy v. Ford (1975), a Federal District Court in Michigan rejected a suit for a declaratory judgment that President Ford's unconditional pardon of Richard M. Nixon was unconstitutional. The court found that the President had the constitutional power to grant a pre-indictment pardon, citing Ex parte Garland in its support.

So this doesn't warrant its own thread probably, buuuuut Sean Spicer has apparently resigned as Press Secretary. Not going to lie, six months was still longer than I expected him to last. Still, this is a terrible blow to the country... well, more specifically, to the country's Saturday Night Live skits.

In any case, with regards to Trump's lawyers reportedly looking into presidential pardons as a literal Get Out Of Jail Free card, from what I've been reading this seems to be another instance where the administration could ironically be trailblazing exactly what the limits, boundaries and powers of the President's office actually are. =P There seems to be some question as to whether or not it would be strictly legal (obviously it would result in massive backlash, but it's not like that has stopped Trump before,) and while there is little direct precedent on a President pardoning himself, shortly before President Nixon resigned from office, the Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion where they cautioned that nobody could be a judge in their own case.

In other words, that since Trump would be both the one deciding to administer the pardon, and the one receiving it, he would effectively be his own judge. Also read something about how the way the law was written seemed to suggest it was designed with the idea that these were two different people, one giving the pardon and one receiving it, not just one doing both. Now, PENCE giving Trump a pardon were he to take office instead could be another story entirely, though I'm not sure that, if Trump was forced out of office, Pence or the Republicans would waste their political capital by helping him out. I guess it would come down to whether they felt the move would bring enough Trump supporters back into the fold, or if they'd be best served by condemning Trump to try and win over everyone else.

But even then it seemed a bit shaky on whether this whole 'Can't Be Your Own Judge' thing would hold up in Supreme Court, where it would ultimately end up.

When it comes to Trump pardoning his family, allies, etc, that's rather more clear-cut, as there have been a few instances of past Presidents granting pardons to political allies and the like. However, what for me makes this hypothetical scenario interesting is what he'd be pardoning them for. Using the authority of the President's office to pardon people whose crimes were conducting illegal activities that helped get you into the President's office in the first place seems like an immense conflict of interest to me, and could reinforce the rather dangerous precedent of 'It Doesn't Matter WHAT Laws You Break To Win, Because If You Win, You Can Just Give Yourselves A Pass For Breaking Them.'

Avnger:

Adam Jensen:
He can't pardon himself before the fact because there's nothing to pardon. You have to be indicted first. And when that happens we're already in impeachment territory so he can't do it then either. My best guess: he'll offer to resign peacefully and avoid the drama. Other Republicans might pressure him to resign as well.

Unfortunately, that's not quite true. A pardon can be granted for any offense already committed regardless of if any indictment or conviction exists.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/05/opinion/l-constitution-allows-pardons-before-conviction-590688.html:
In Murphy v. Ford (1975), a Federal District Court in Michigan rejected a suit for a declaratory judgment that President Ford's unconditional pardon of Richard M. Nixon was unconstitutional. The court found that the President had the constitutional power to grant a pre-indictment pardon, citing Ex parte Garland in its support.

That's so strange. But if it's true it wouldn't prevent impeachment. In fact it would ensure it because pardoning yourself would be an admission of guilt. And if he were to do this, he'd have to specify exactly what he's pardoning himself for. If not, he could be indicted for all the things that he didn't pardon himself for.

Adam Jensen:

That's so strange. But if it's true it wouldn't prevent impeachment. In fact it would ensure it because pardoning yourself would be an admission of guilt. And if he were to do this, he'd have to specify exactly what he's pardoning himself for. If not, he could be indicted for all the things that he didn't pardon himself for.

While it is indeed true that a pardon would neither protect from, nor reverse impeachment, the related problem in this particular circumstance is the one also underlying the whole Russia investigation; i.e. even if there IS something actionable that could get Trump impeached, will the Republicans actually do it? I might be wrong about this, but I seem to recall reading that impeachment isn't this 'Cause, Effect' guarantee, it ultimately needs the backing of the other branches of government to even head to a courtroom, let alone be carried out. In theory, if the Republicans felt that backing Trump was more beneficial to their interests than impeaching him, even something like an abuse of Presidential powers might not result in his expulsion from office. I'm not sure if there IS anything that, strictly speaking, automatically expels a President from office, meaning that whatever might get him booted, the Republicans would ultimately have to be on board with that, barring of course the Democrats somehow taking over.

SeventhSigil:
even if there IS something actionable that could get Trump impeached, will the Republicans actually do it?

If Trump can pardon himself, like I said, it would be an admission of guilt. And if Republicans don't react to something like that it would lead to the biggest constitutional crisis in the history of the US. It would be career suicide not to impeach Trump at that point and they know it.

Adam Jensen:

SeventhSigil:
even if there IS something actionable that could get Trump impeached, will the Republicans actually do it?

If Trump can pardon himself, like I said, it would be an admission of guilt. And if Republicans don't react to something like that it would lead to the biggest constitutional crisis in the history of the US. It would be career suicide not to impeach Trump at that point and they know it.

I'm not explicitly disagreeing on that, but at this point I also kind of feel like we passed the point the Republicans should have put their foot down at least a month ago, if not longer. =P Trump's firing of Comey was similarly pretty jaw-dropping, especially with the interview that followed soon after when he both admitted it was something he wanted to do, and flat-out seemed to connect it to the Russia investigation. But ultimately the Republicans did squat, outlets like Fox News did everything in their power to defend and normalize the decision (and are already normalizing the idea of Trump firing the special counsel running the Russia investigation,) and a not-insignificant number of his supporters still seem to, well, support him. =P The whole Donald Trump Jr. thing, again, WTF. But the Republicans did squat, outlets like Fox News did everything in their power to defend and normalize the decision, and a not-insignificant number of his supporters still seem to, well, support him. =P

Are there still enough Trump supporters to help him win a re-election? God I hope not. But perhaps still a large enough group to make the Republicans leery of doing anything to alienate them, particularly since losing that particular group of supporters would mean losing loads of Republican voters.

In other words, sorta reached this point where I think literally NOTHING Trump does will ever see him impeached, and literally nothing Trump does will cost him the support of the people who're still supporting him. =P

SeventhSigil:
I'm not explicitly disagreeing on that, but at this point I also kind of feel like we passed the point the Republicans should have put their foot down at least a month ago, if not longer.

They won't lift a finger until their careers are on the line. Without concrete evidence against Trump they don't have to do anything. But supporting a criminal president who uses his presidential powers to pardon himself and his family for literal crimes involving but probably not limited to obstruction of justice, bribery, witness intimidation, tampering with evidence, espionage, money laundering, extortion, embezzling, potential treason etc. would without any question end their careers and bury the GOP. No one gets away with that.

SeventhSigil:
In other words, sorta reached this point where I think literally NOTHING Trump does will ever see him impeached, and literally nothing Trump does will cost him the support of the people who're still supporting him. =P

His support is already historically low and that's not gonna change for the better.

Adam Jensen:

SeventhSigil:
I'm not explicitly disagreeing on that, but at this point I also kind of feel like we passed the point the Republicans should have put their foot down at least a month ago, if not longer.

They won't lift a finger until their careers are on the line. Without concrete evidence against Trump they don't have to do anything. But supporting a criminal president who uses his presidential powers to to pardon himself and his family for literal crimes involving but probably not limited to obstruction of justice, bribery, witness intimidation, tampering with evidence, espionage, money laundering, extortion, embezzling, potential treason etc. would without any question end their careers and bury the GOP. No one gets away with that.

SeventhSigil:
In other words, sorta reached this point where I think literally NOTHING Trump does will ever see him impeached, and literally nothing Trump does will cost him the support of the people who're still supporting him. =P

His support is already historically low and that's not gonna change for the better.

I am hoping that'd be the case, but... eh. x3 My ability to trust in the reason and logic of others is also at a historic low, so at this point I kind of feel like any development, no matter how strange or ludicrous, leaves me sort of throwing up my hands going 'Oh, well I guess this is a thing now! Sure, why not?!' That post Basement Cat made above kind of typifies the amazing amount of backtracking, goalpost moving and general amount of terrible lying that has been going on; emphasis on terrible, as not only does is this administration brazenly dishonest, they're not even particularly clever about keeping it consistent or believable. =P And yet, the usual circles still line up to defend and support them, time and time again.

What has me largely concerned is that this is a case where there seems to be no actual legal remedy or restriction to something like Trump pardoning his family, as best case scenario it might be a relatively untested issue. There is a political remedy in the form of impeachment but, more importantly even than whether it would bury the GOP, the question is whether the GOP would even recognize that it would bury them. =P Assuming Trump did not resign, (and I say it's 50/50 on whether he'd choose to dig in his heels and scream 'SYSTEM'S FIXED AGAINST ME!' while calling for a march on Washington,) he would effectively be the first U.S. President to be successfully impeached from office. Not sure the Republicans have the spine, the fortitude, or the foresight to willingly do that to themselves, at least not enough of them to successfully carry out an impeachment. Especially if they feel like they can just spin the narrative to, if not convince everyone, at least convince their existing supporters that Trump's actions were justifiable.

I know this sounds incredibly pessimistic, but I haven't been seeing much from the administration to inspire much confidence that the other branches and framework will keep them fully in check. Even the motion seeking to restrict Trump's ability to change the scope of sanctions against Russia, (preventing him from reducing them, increasing them, or removing them without, iirc, Congressional approval,) seems to have gotten stuck in the proverbial pipes. And even if it gets un-stuck, at the end of the day it's still going to end up on Trump's desk to either sign or veto. =P

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here