At 7/9/17 05:43 PM, EdyKel wrote: I'm not sure what Republicans can do to take away any more executive powers, under Trump, than just opposing things he does. I mean, from the time of Bush, who was given a lot of war time powers because of 9-11, Congress has been chipping away at them - mostly for partisan reasons.

They can do a lot actually. I think you need to study Presidential history better. Yes, they have weakened his ability to lift sanctions on Russia and all that, but they've done little else that I've heard of to really weaken the office or him. Most of what they've been doing it seems is things that they can simply do without his help (like abolishing Obama era rules within the expiration date). Just like most of what he's accomplished so far has been done without the need for Congressional approval (his Executive Orders). This is the thing that I think people keep missing: Yes, the current US government is dangerous to the average person as they are nakedly out for a very small percentage of the population and for themselves....but it is also critical to understand how divided and unsure they are of how to govern, that is a weakness that should be exploited to the hilt. The Special Prosecutor isn't helping matters either for them.

At 7/10/17 12:37 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 7/9/17 05:43 PM, EdyKel wrote: I'm not sure what Republicans can do to take away any more executive powers, under Trump, than just opposing things he does. I mean, from the time of Bush, who was given a lot of war time powers because of 9-11, Congress has been chipping away at them - mostly for partisan reasons.

They can do a lot actually. I think you need to study Presidential history better. Yes, they have weakened his ability to lift sanctions on Russia and all that, but they've done little else that I've heard of to really weaken the office or him. Most of what they've been doing it seems is things that they can simply do without his help (like abolishing Obama era rules within the expiration date). Just like most of what he's accomplished so far has been done without the need for Congressional approval (his Executive Orders). This is the thing that I think people keep missing: Yes, the current US government is dangerous to the average person as they are nakedly out for a very small percentage of the population and for themselves....but it is also critical to understand how divided and unsure they are of how to govern, that is a weakness that should be exploited to the hilt. The Special Prosecutor isn't helping matters either for them.

That really doesn't explain anything. Perhaps I should have said "What are Republicans are willing to do, and can do, to curb executive powers.

The Republican controlled Congress could have done more against Obama executive powers, to keep him under more control. I mean, Obama did a lot of things with his executive powers, with many accusing him of being tyrannical for using it, but did nothing - and they certainly didn't expect Trump to win and undo many of the things he did. So, there was a distinct reluctance on their part to do anything to really curb his power, even though they are so politically driven to thwart their political opponents, at all cost, these days.

Yes, they did pass legislation to prevent Trump from lifting sanctions against Russia, but that was for just a specific case. And while there is a lot of concern about Trump's suggestion a US/Russia unit on election hacking, the idea that he could create this, without Congressional consent, is unlikely because they control the purse strings for funding such things. And while Congress is mostly united against his policies of creating friendlier relations with Russia, because of what they did in our elections, and their cravings to undermine our standing in the world, it's unlikely they will do anything outside of that, which doesn't come short of an impeachable offense - and even then, because of how polarized the country is, and congress, opinions may differ on what an impeachable offense is.

We have a divided congress, not just between the two parties, but within them as well, which is why it has been so hard for them to pass a replacement plan for Obamacare, a plan that is highly, and deeply, unpopular among the public - not to mention that Congress's approval rating is barely in the double digits. Congress is basically relying on one party to get things passed in it. The only compromise they do is among the members of the same party, and even then that is not easy thing to do.

While we may not like the way Trump is directing government agencies to do things that either seem reckless and almost tyrannical, like allowing companies to pollute clean water, or collect voter information, or tear families apart by cracking down on illegals, or enforce another costly war on drugs campaign that fills up jails and doesn't get rid of the problem, the idea that congress will act on any of this stuff seems unlikely. Many members of the controlling party fully support these things, and given the narrowness of the seats they have, they would need almost all their members to support any proceedings to curb anyone of these, without resorting to going across the aisle to work with Democrats.

So, again, what can congress actually do to curb executive powers that they are willing to do, and can do, not what they are capable of doing, according to our Constitution?

...and here we see a human male potentially destroying his entire family in just two tweets:

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884789418455953413
https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884789839522140166

Apparently NYT was just about to report on this, so Trump Jr. just released. Them. Himself.

Truly mind bending.

At 7/11/17 12:43 PM, ChazDude wrote: ...and here we see a human male potentially destroying his entire family in just two tweets:

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884789418455953413
https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884789839522140166

Apparently NYT was just about to report on this, so Trump Jr. just released. Them. Himself.

Truly mind bending.

It's hard to say why he did this. I mean, it shows a willingness of members of the Trump campaign to seek foreign help to find damaging info on their political opponent, and it showed Russia that members in the Trump campaign were willing to risk, or stupid enough, to obtain damaging info on their political opponent from them. No matter how you look at it, it does not help to make the Trump admin, or people close to it, look innocent.So why did he release this then? Did he think this was going to be found out, and acted out of fear to get out his own story of events over it. Or was this just used as a distraction, to cover up something else? This whole thing has been strange... But then, this is Trump America, where strange and bizarre have become normal under this President.

At 7/11/17 03:33 PM, EdyKel wrote:

At 7/11/17 12:43 PM, ChazDude wrote: Apparently NYT was just about to report on this, so Trump Jr. just released. Them. Himself.
Truly mind bending.

It's hard to say why he did this.

As the Twitter replies point out, it's a guise of transparency even though he's only doing it because NYT would report it.

As far as events go, I doubt this will change people's opinion on Trump's presidency or his family, and after 6 months of similar revelations I think it can be expected that if the emails were brought out in the open little will change as a result.

At 7/11/17 06:36 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote: As the Twitter replies point out, it's a guise of transparency even though he's only doing it because NYT would report it.

Exactly. It's a bumbling attempt by people who have no real clue what the fuck they're doing to try and get ahead of a damaging story by basically saying "before you blow me up....I'll blow myself up...and then I control the narrative, haha!" No pal, you've still set fire to yourself and your family, you're not the Human Torch, you don't control those flames. He's just provided clear and unimpeachable evidence that the Trump Campaign colluded with Russia. He took the meeting, he brought the then Campaign Manager in, and a man who became a Senior White House adviser in. The defense that "we didn't get anything we could use" is not an excuse, it's about WILLINGNESS. You were clearly told "a rep of a foreign government wants to give you intel on an opponent because they want you to win" that's collusion. The appropriate response was to say "yeah no, not gonna take that meeting" maybe add a "thanks anyway" if it's a bridge you don't want to burn, only hardcore partisans could shit on you for those last two words when all the words proceeding it were clearly you doing what's right.

Idiots, idiots all. Mike Pence is sitting in the bunker right now till it's time to take The Oath of Office.

At 7/11/17 07:17 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 7/11/17 06:36 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:

Idiots, idiots all. Mike Pence is sitting in the bunker right now till it's time to take The Oath of Office.

Honestly this seems to be a game of keeping Trump in and using him to damage Republicans as much as possible and impeaching him in 2018 in time for an electoral advantage for Dems.

As terrible as Trump is, Pence would actually not be incompetent and with a Repub majority in Congress and senate Dems would be in a worse position. Meanwhile, Trump as president does plenty of damage to the republican brand, but also our country unfortunately.

These next 2-4 years will be a real pain.

At 7/11/17 06:36 PM, TurkeyOnAStick wrote:

At 7/11/17 03:33 PM, EdyKel wrote:

At 7/11/17 12:43 PM, ChazDude wrote: Apparently NYT was just about to report on this, so Trump Jr. just released. Them. Himself.
Truly mind bending.

It's hard to say why he did this.

As the Twitter replies point out, it's a guise of transparency even though he's only doing it because NYT would report it.

As far as events go, I doubt this will change people's opinion on Trump's presidency or his family, and after 6 months of similar revelations I think it can be expected that if the emails were brought out in the open little will change as a result.

Yeah, but it was a pretty lousy way to do it, releasing the whole e-mail exchange between himself and Rob Goldstone. That e-mail release was the most damning evidence against him. He could of simply downplayed the meeting like he did, or did what his father does and call it fake news and vehemently deny it, without releasing that e-mail exchange. And none of this answers who tipped off the NYT reporter, who had been following it for a year. I mean, there weren't a whole lot of people privy to this e-mail, or the meeting with the Russian Nationalist.

And I agree it won't change anyone minds... But it will be harder to defend the idea that Trump didn't know anything, or there was absolutely no collusion between members of the Trump campaign and Russia, even if Donald Jr did come very close to that in this one instance that we know about.

At 7/11/17 07:17 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Exactly. It's a bumbling attempt by people who have no real clue what the fuck they're doing to try and get ahead of a damaging story by basically saying "before you blow me up....I'll blow myself up...and then I control the narrative, haha!" No pal, you've still set fire to yourself and your family, you're not the Human Torch, you don't control those flames. He's just provided clear and unimpeachable evidence that the Trump Campaign colluded with Russia.

Perhaps he's thinking that it's only collusion if you succeed. Problem is, when it comes to collusion the intent is the problem.

This is a common defense among Trump fans. They say that since Russia connections never materialized (as far as we know) into any actual tampering, or influence on the outcome, there was no problem. They're right in that we will likely never find any conclusive or near conclusive proof that any actions with Russia actually changed the election. Again, that is irrelevant. The fact is that they attempted both to undermine the Presidential elections AND do so by means of a foreign counrty (a quite hostile one at that). Attempting is enough.

Idiots, idiots all. Mike Pence is sitting in the bunker right now till it's time to take The Oath of Office.

Fuck, if Pence gets the Oath, I will be in a bunker.

Things just keep getting worse every passing day.

At 7/12/17 04:55 AM, Fluffington wrote: Is it just me or does anyone else roll their eyes whenever someone talks about the Russia conspiracy on the news? It's such a stupid issue to dwell on.

Except for it's not.

The issue here is there is now evidence that someone who sought (and did) become President of The US ran a campaign with numerous and repeated contacts with not just a hostile foreign government, but criminal elements who are sanctioned and a part of that government. I continue to be baffled that some people can't understand the obvious implications of that and how they can be harmful to the US and it's interests.

At 7/11/17 11:01 PM, Sause wrote: SOMETHING MUST BE DONE

That's why we have the multiple investigations going on. :)

At 7/11/17 08:20 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Fuck, if Pence gets the Oath, I will be in a bunker.

From what I've heard, Pence isn't the subject of any part of the investigations right now. If Pence is in no way tied to any wrong doing or illegality, of course he'll be sworn in should/when Trump is impeached. This is the outcome pretty much every mainstream Republican wants from all of this from reports that I've been seeing on and off since at least December.

At 7/12/17 01:53 PM, Sause wrote:

At 7/12/17 12:40 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 7/11/17 11:01 PM, Sause wrote: SOMETHING MUST BE DONE

That's why we have the multiple investigations going on. :)

Which makes for a good bumper sticker for 2018

Look, if there was anything, they would have found it by now.

So the multiple investigations are engineered optics for the Drumpf's Downfall campaign

Not really. We found out, courtesy of Donald Jr., that he, and other members of Trumps campaign, were actively seeking any dirt about Clinton, and were willing to work with Russia as far back as June. We also know that Trump, on the campaign trail, promised his supporters some very interesting news about Clinton, after the date of this meeting. Of course, the meeting failed to materialize anything of use, but talks of lifting Russian sanction. So, Trump could not deliver that “I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting.” information on Clinton, but promised that it would come later. And Low and behold, weeks before the election, hacked e-mails from the DNC were released by wikileaks, which did affect the outcome of the election in his favor.

No matter how you look at it, we know that Russia (which all our intelligence agencies agree were behind the hacking) wanted Trump to win, and we know that Trump, and many in his family, and campaign, had business dealings/ties with them, through various connections, and were interested in lifting the sanctions against them. You can't take a step with out being tangled up in some type of connection between Trump's campaign and Russia. And most alarming is that Trump has raged against the idea that Russia were behind the hacking, or tried to hack into various state's voter registration databases across the country. He has shown no interests in doing anything about this. He claimed our election system is rigged, and accused millions of illegally voting in it, without proof, as if try to de-legitimize our voting system, and here we have proof that a foreign country was trying to do just that and he does nothing about it.

While we may not know, yet, if there is any solid evidence that trump, or one or more people in his family, or campaign, actually struck a bargain with a Russian official, we have evidence that one of them was seeking to collude with them, with the knowledge of two others, and this person could very much have broken the law because of that. No, this investigation just got new life in thanks to Donald Jr.

At 7/12/17 03:51 PM, Fluffington wrote: The thing is, I don't actually care?

I suspect if it was the other way around, and it did affect you in a negative way, then you would care. The fact that foreign nation did this, with an administration that does not want to admit it was done by them, and has shown no interests in tying to prevent it, because he benefits from it, should be a concern to everyone. After all, this guy kept promoting the idea that the election was rigged against him, though it seems it was rigged for him by a foreign government, who also tried to hack into various state voter registration sites for him. I'm sure that this is something you don't care about either, right?

The thing is, I don't actually care? Take this for an example, if a hacker hacked my boyfriend's phone and revealed that he's been cheating on me all this time, and I break up with him as a result, I wouldn't blame the hacker for my break up, I would blame my boyfriend.

Do I sense an FDR watcher?

At 7/12/17 03:51 PM, Fluffington wrote: The thing is, I don't actually care?

If you weren't here talking about it, I'd believe that a hell of a lot more.

Take this for an example, if a hacker hacked my boyfriend's phone and revealed that he's been cheating on me all this time, and I break up with him as a result, I wouldn't blame the hacker for my break up, I would blame my boyfriend. And just like the DNC, they are so upset because they were caught and their wrong doings were revealed to the world through Wikileaks.

This is not the same thing whatsoever though. It's missing the forest for the trees. Because what we are seeing is a foreign government influencing our electoral process, putting their thumb on the scale and saying "you will get the leader we want you to have that will be best for us, not the leader that is best for you". Why would you consider that to be an acceptable situation.

Russia wanting Trump to win? Of course they would want Trump to win, Hillary has on numerous occasions threatened Russia and expressed her intent to have conflict with him, meanwhile Trump has expressed that he would rather there be peaceful relationships with Russia. Put yourself in Russia's place and ask yourself; Which leader would I rather my rival have? One that's openly hostile? Or the other one who'd rather come to an agreement?

Why the fuck should I care what Russia wants or needs? Why the fuck should you? Russia is a malicious, belligerent actor on the world stage, has been for pretty much it's entire existence, it's at one of it's most ugly stages now. I don't want them influencing my country, I surely don't want them doing it through an administration that continuously shows it's only true North is it's own enrichment and protecting it's own. I don't understand why this would be ok to anyone unless they are Russian, they are somehow benefitting directly the Trump administration, or you just can't be bothered to do the basic work of looking at what these people want to do. Because the average American? We're going to be hurt if this administration and the Republican Party can accomplish it's policy aims

Secondly, there's no actual proof despite half the country desperately grasping for one.

I'm tired of this. There is no PUBLIC proof made avaliable of any collusion. It is the considered opinion of the intelligence community that Russia was involved in an influence campaign, and that wikileaks got the emails thanks to Russia. Evidence continues to emerge that Trump and those involved with his campaign have been repeatedly untruthful about meetings with Russia and contacts with it's government and/or it's surrogates. This is not "desperately grasping" for evidence or proof. This has now become Trump supporters desperately moving the goal posts or willfully ignoring the damage and potential law breaking that has been going on now.

The only thing they got on Trump is that his son replied to a false, non-government lead that lead to a dead end, you also have to keep in mind that Trump Jr. is a private citizen, not a politician, and he can have contacts with whoever he wants.

No, that isn't the case anymore. Jr. has secruity clearance, he had to fill out a legal form for that and leaving this meeting off that form is a giant no no. Same for Kushner. These are people that are used to dealing with law breaking as "ok, I say I'm sorry and I pay a fine and it goes away" that doesn't work at this level. Fuck ups like this carry severe penalties up to and including the removal of Trump from office.

The fact that you didn't know Jr. has these clearances, or that Kushner does (and is also implicated because he was at this meeting and hasn't denied that, and similarly left it off his forms), evalates them above "private citizen". Also acting as a part of a Presidential Campaign makes you more then a "private citizen". Everybody agrees what he should have done here (well, except Right-Wing house organs): He should have said "thanks but no thanks" and then promptly called the FBI and reported this.

At 7/12/17 03:51 PM, Fluffington wrote: The thing is, I don't actually care? Take this for an example, if a hacker hacked my boyfriend's phone and revealed that he's been cheating on me all this time, and I break up with him as a result, I wouldn't blame the hacker for my break up, I would blame my boyfriend. And just like the DNC, they are so upset because they were caught and their wrong doings were revealed to the world through Wikileaks.

This is a poor analogy to use because under this scenario it's much more likely that an actual crime (illegal usage of a computer or any other law or statute dealing with such matters) has been committed than in the specific case of Don Jr's meeting. How you feel about the law being broken or how you would personally manage the fallout from personal information
being leaked is completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not an illegal act was committed in addition to the appropriate legal recourse available to you. Also note that your boyfriend can still be a cheating asshole and that illegally obtained information can still be useful to you in dealing with him, but that's merely a matter of personal choice and free will. You could very well go after both individuals: the boyfriend and the hacker, if that's a course of action you would like to pursue.

You seem to be arguing that the legal ramifications surrounding the hack are irrelevant because they are inconsequential within the narrow context of your own personal feelings, but try telling that to Mueller and the chairmen of the myriad of congressional investigations/probes into his alleged contacts with influential Russian individuals married with extensive intelligence reports suggesting that the Kremlin has been orchestrating an unprecedented election interference operation.

At 7/12/17 08:35 PM, Fluffington wrote: What I don't care is whether or not Russia hacked the email, to me that aspect is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned this is nothing more than the DNC throwing a temper tantrum over losing the election after evidence of their corruption was leaked, blaming everybody but themselves.

So it's more about you not understanding the issue. Ok. That makes a bit more sense for me now, I appreciate you clearing that up. Seriously, I know that sounded sarcastic probably, but it wasn't meant to.

Because Hillary is far from innocent when it comes to foreign intervention and help.

Forest for the trees, apples to....well, you didn't provide any evidence so....apples to air I guess?

Are you just going to pretend that the tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations to Hillary Clinton from foreign government entities just didn't happen? We're not talking about a single foreign government here, we're talking about multiple government entities with a vested interest in getting her elected, many of whom are major human rights violators who'd benefit massively for the US to just "look the other way". Countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and many others. If you want to be outraged over foreign influences on our elections, at least be consistent.

I have never seen the legit sources on this. Please keep in mind one of the things Russia did to influence was plant fake news stories out there....you may have been a victim of this. Could you provide me with some sources I could look at for these stories so that we could examine them and make sure we're both playing from the field of truth? I'd appreciate it.

Also, it is a false premise to assume that because I am critical of the sitting President getting help from a foreign power (and this latest story makes that beyond doubt now), that I would not be critical of a Hillary attempt to do same if uncovered. It also is a false premise to assume I was a fan or supporter of hers. While I did vote for her, it was more of a "this would be the best of a bunch of bad options" I registered for the primary in my state, and voted for Bernie Sanders then, and would have done so again in the General had I a write in option on the ballot. I'm in a safely blue state....my votes in a Presidential don't really matter thanks to the Electoral College.

Because I don't have an irrational hatred of an entire country because war profiteering propagandists tells me to, because diplomacy isn't a zero sum game, because in a situation where there's a choice between peace or war I will always prefer peace. Because a proverbial dick measuring contest against Russia isn't worth risking thermonuclear annihilation over.

That is once again, you not understanding the situation. It's not an all or nothing game here. Punishing Russia and discouraging them from being a malicious actor is GOOD diplomacy and national security. You sound a lot like Neville Chamberlain and his approach to Hitler. Crack a history book and see how "appeasement" of a malicious, authoritarian regime ends.

There is tons to criticize about Trump and his many different policies, but I will take his policy on Russia over Hillary's hawkish, warmongering brand of "diplomacy" any day of the week. Relationships with Russia has improved under Trump, and I won't call that a bad thing no matter how much I might dislike certain things the country does.

Once again, not understanding the price we pay for that, or will pay.

If they had any solid bit of evidence they would've nailed him already.

Oh, are you an expert in these things? Done much governmental investigation have you? You're a Constitutional scholar or lawyer then? Present your credentials please so I can be better informed as to who I'm speaking with.

Are you telling me that the entirety of the DNC, establishment & deep state can't produce enough evidence to get rid of the person mucking up their plans? Until that happens this is nothing but a glorified conspiracy theory.

Oh, "deep state" you're one of THOSE people....I suspected but....It's nice to be confirmed.

I'll agree that Trump Jr. should have handled this better, like passing off the dealing to lower ranked campaign staffers, or to the FBI.

No, FBI. That is what you do. You do NOT ever take that meeting, you do not shuffle it down to other people lower to take that meeting and that bullet if it's disclosed. You say "no thank you" and then you promptly tell the FBI a foreign government tried to give you dirt on an opposing candidate thus getting involved in the election. Not doing that is a massive no no.

But at the end of the day he accepted a meeting with someone who claimed to be a Russian attorney, and nothing happened.

This is a WILD oversimplification and suggests to me you didn't read the emails. In fact, only someone who didn't read the emails could think it's as simple as this.

The only thing the emails shown indicates was that he was willing to set up a meeting to find out potential dirt against the opponents of a campaign he was working for.

No, it also clearly points out that the equivalent of the Russian equivalent of the Attorney General had dirt they were willing to share through this intermediary with the Trump Campaign. It is the clearest evidence yet that Russia absolutely sought to put it's finger on the scale. It's damaging and potentially damning for Trump. Either it's going to be proved he knew about this....or that he's so friggin incompetent that people close to him could do this and he wouldn't know about it.

And yes, at the time he replied to the email he was indeed a private citizen, working on a campaign doesn't change the fact that he was a private citizen at the time before Trump was elected.

It really actually does. Also, when he didn't disclose this meeting on his security forms, that potentially opens him up to a host of legal consequences. You know not of what you speak. Each new part of your reply proves it. You're one of those apologists who's never going to be shaken from your narrative apparently. In part because you don't understand why these things are wrong it seems.

At 7/13/17 12:47 PM, Sause wrote: i practically miss the days when they'd call trump a nazi in every dietrump story

It did make it easier for you act superior and happy that you're minority viewpoint was somehow ascendant and the Left was just crazy right?

Pesky bastards they are....knowing how to investigate stuff, find evidence....oh, and Trump and everybody around him being the worst criminals because they're used to doing crime, and then getting a slap on the wrist for it and moving on to do new crime. That too.

Ho hum, never a dull day under the Trump admin:

Trump Lawyer Marc Kasowitz Threatens Stranger in Emails: ‘Watch Your Back , Bitch’

I think the pressure is really getting to them.

At 7/13/17 07:37 PM, EdyKel wrote: I think the pressure is really getting to them.

Like I said to Sause, this isn't the sort of situation they're familiar with. They're used to instances where if they break the law, they just settle. Or they pay a fine and they move on to their next round of sleazy dealing and associating with a bad criminal element. I almost think when the hammer comes down, Trump will be smiling like the cat that ate the canary when the cameras are off. This isn't what he wanted.

At 7/13/17 07:37 PM, EdyKel wrote: Ho hum, never a dull day under the Trump admin:

Trump Lawyer Marc Kasowitz Threatens Stranger in Emails: ‘Watch Your Back , Bitch’

I think the pressure is really getting to them.

Somehow, I just can't help but feel that Mike Pence is secretly licking his chops in all this. If Trump somehow manages to avoid impeachment or removal of office in other ways, then he's essentially skating by with his neoconservative record intact, and even if Trump does, Pence will use him as a fall guy and get shit done as President, and for all of the heat we put on Trump for being a neocon mouthpiece, (as well as a puppet) Pence will actually be able to strike, and be effective at it with a Republican dominated Congress.

When you have a VP that makes Dubya liberal by comparison and with none of the good intentions at heart, (for anyone who isn't a hardline neocon) it's a bad combination to say the least.

I would not be so quick to assume that Pence is not also a liability in the Trump administration.

At 7/13/17 05:19 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 7/13/17 12:47 PM, Sause wrote: i practically miss the days when they'd call trump a nazi in every dietrump story

It did make it easier for you act superior and happy that you're minority viewpoint was somehow ascendant and the Left was just crazy right?

Pesky bastards they are....knowing how to investigate stuff, find evidence....oh, and Trump and everybody around him being the worst criminals because they're used to doing crime, and then getting a slap on the wrist for it and moving on to do new crime. That too.

Have yet to see any "crimes" commited, all in all it still shows the left is nothing but a bunch of unhinged loons.

The saddest thing is that the dem strategy is "impeachment" when in reality there zero possibility of that ever happening.

At 7/17/17 04:38 PM, PilotCman wrote: Have yet to see any "crimes" commited, all in all it still shows the left is nothing but a bunch of unhinged loons.

Accepting help from a foreign national for an election is a crime.

Section 30121 of Title 52
(a) Prohibition It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or OTHER THING OF VALUE, or to make an express or implied promise
to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(2) a person to SOLICIT, ACCEPT, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of
paragraph (1) from a FOREIGN NATIONAL.

At 7/17/17 09:23 PM, Sause wrote:

Well, she said she had "dirt" (paraphrasing) I do not believe information counts as a "thing" in a tangible sense, depending on the interpretation of that law. But I think, considering the juxtaposition to money next to it, the corporeal sense of the phrase "thing of value" might be used here.

In this day and age information is a thing of value.

Plus no actual information was divulged. The Russian lawyer used that as a ruse, a lie, in order to get access to a potential ally in her help for Russian orphans. Although, lying for the sake of orphaned children isn't the worst thing you can do.

The fact that Jr. accepted the meeting for information is enough. Like a sting operation, the perp may not get anything out of it but the fact that they tried is still a crime.

Does it look bad? Yeah, but I don't think it's going to be Drumpf's Downfall

Who knows at this point.

At 7/17/17 04:38 PM, PilotCman wrote: Have yet to see any "crimes" commited, all in all it still shows the left is nothing but a bunch of unhinged loons.

FOX News defense. Also, you forget about the ongoing special investigation.

The saddest thing is that the dem strategy is "impeachment" when in reality there zero possibility of that ever happening.

Riiiiight, because there's literally no chance that a historically unpopular President could be the victim of a "wave election" at the mid-terms when President's who were MORE popular have been victimized by same. Or hell, even that he could simply lose his slim Senate majority because even more popular Presidents have lost seats in Congress, it's pretty much inevitable that some part of the folks that elected you break off and get pissed at the job your doing (right or wrong) by the mid-terms.

You guys aren't showing that the opposition is "loony" or "stupid" or whatever your preferred word is. You're showing your own lack of ability to look at some basic historical trends and possibilities. You should never slam the door on a possibility. The mere fact that this topic exists at this point in time in this forum tells us that.

At 7/13/17 05:19 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: Pesky bastards they are....knowing how to investigate stuff, find evidence....oh, and Trump and everybody around him being the worst criminals because they're used to doing crime, and then getting a slap on the wrist for it and moving on to do new crime. That too.

That is what will become the game changer. To just show, how easy it is to get away with so much. Not only that, but do it in plain sight. I hate how a lot of people are adding the moniker "gate" at the end of anything Trump does now. This is nothing like Watergate. Why? Because that actually got a President to resign. Watergate was an outright expose. You can't expose something that is already out in the open! It is absolutely ridiculous!

Anybody who runs against Trump in 2020, which most likely he will run for re-election. The debates won't matter at all. All Donald Trump has to do is just reply with "so" with each point made. Granted that'll be too easy and he'll surely find a way to screw that up, but that's the gist of where we are now and it is bonkers!

At 7/20/17 11:38 AM, Sause wrote: Have we discussed his health yet? The presidency can do horrors to a person's mental and physical health, and Trump entered the office older than any president in history.

I don't think we have too much....I mean, I've heard some people talk about possible dementia or psychological issues. But I feel like especially in our case we have to invoke the "Goldwater Rule" to shy away. Since I don't think any of us have the credentials. But yeah, just look at pictures of past President's from when they come in, vs what they look like when it ends (especially two termers) the toll physically is startling.