Collusion with Russia

[Ten oz]

In addition to the revaluations regarding Manafort sharing internal polling data with Russia turns out U.S. Intelligence official were (perhaps still are) afraid Trump posed a risk to national security and was taking direction from Russia.

The same people who questioned Obama's citizenship and cried about Clinton using a smart phone to read email voted for a guy who literally may be in bed with a foriegn adversary.

Quote

 

WASHINGTON — In the days after President Trump fired James B. Comey as F.B.I. director, law enforcement officials became so concerned by the president’s behavior that they began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests, according to former law enforcement officials and others familiar with the investigation.

The inquiry carried explosive implications. Counterintelligence investigators had to consider whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security. Agents also sought to determine whether Mr. Trump was knowingly working for Russia or had unwittingly fallen under Moscow’s influence.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/us/politics/fbi-trump-russia-inquiry.html

 

 

[geordief]

 

His legal team would like to redact Mueller's final report

https://www.theroot.com/rudy-giuliani-who-married-to-his-cousin-believes-trum-1831679592

 

Not sure about that source  but this issue was being discussed last night after the NYTimes  story broke.

 

Seems ironic that anyone near Trump  could bring up National Security but there you have it.

 

[J.C.MacSwell]

15 minutes ago, geordief said:

 

His legal team would like to redact Mueller's final report

https://www.theroot.com/rudy-giuliani-who-married-to-his-cousin-believes-trum-1831679592

 

Not sure about that source  but this issue was being discussed last night after the NYTimes  story broke.

 

Seems ironic that anyone near Trump  could bring up National Security but there you have it.

 

From the link:

"President Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, who was once married to his second cousin, believes that Trump’s legal team should be able to see special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on whether Russia colluded to hand Russian Vice-President Donald Trump America’s presidential election before it goes to Congress or the American people so they can correct it."

Who writes this stuff?

[Ten oz]

28 minutes ago, geordief said:

 

His legal team would like to redact Mueller's final report

https://www.theroot.com/rudy-giuliani-who-married-to-his-cousin-believes-trum-1831679592

 

Not sure about that source  but this issue was being discussed last night after the NYTimes  story broke.

 

Seems ironic that anyone near Trump  could bring up National Security but there you have it.

 

The Mueller investigation has gotten guilty pleas or indicted 33 separate individuals and that doesn't include the business we know are being looked into. In court a federal judge referred to Flyn's actions as "treason" and told him directly "you sold out your country". Trump long time personal Lawyer has already pleaded to multiple felonies and is cooperating with investigators on other possible felonies. Manafort has been found guilt in court on multiple felonies and shared campaign data with Russia . Trump himself is a national security threat yet currently has the govt shutdown and is threatening a national emergency (so he can bypass the other branches of govt) over national security. It is insane. Stranger than fiction. 

[geordief]

14 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

From the link:

"President Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, who was once married to his second cousin, believes that Trump’s legal team should be able to see special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on whether Russia colluded to hand Russian Vice-President Donald Trump America’s presidential election before it goes to Congress or the American people so they can correct it."

Who writes this stuff?

Bad comedy. I only linked it to highlight the redaction issue.But "Russian Vice-President Donald Trump" is quite close to the bone although it should more appropriately perhaps  read "American Presidential puppeter VPutin" 

[Ten oz]

Trump has been concealing details of his conversations with Putin from his own advisers. Mueller investigation aside the Office of the President is a one meant to serve the public at large. For the sake of national security and long term international relations it doesn't make sense for a President to keep his or her (though there has never been a her) own staff in the dark. 

Quote

 

President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said.

Trump did so after a meeting with Putin in 2017 in Hamburg that was also attended by then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. U.S. officials learned of Trump’s actions when a White House adviser and a senior State Department official sought information from the interpreter beyond a readout shared by Tillerson.

The constraints that Trump imposed are part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States’ main adversaries. Link

 

 

[geordief]

14 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Trump has been concealing details of his conversations with Putin from his own advisers. Mueller investigation aside the Office of the President is a one meant to serve the public at large. For the sake of national security and long term international relations it doesn't make sense for a President to keep his or her (though there has never been a her) own staff in the dark. 

 

Is that new information? I thought it had been noted around the time?

He also tears up documents doesn't he?

The Repubs are OK with all that and put no pressure on him to desist from that behaviour? 

Is it his right as President to do that?

[Ten oz]

2 minutes ago, geordief said:

Is that new information? I thought it had been noted around the time?

I was aware that Trump had met with Putin without advisers present but it is new information (at least to me) that Trump destroyed his interpreters notes. 

4 minutes ago, geordief said:

He also tears up documents doesn't he?

He does however I am not sure which specific ones you are referencing. 

5 minutes ago, geordief said:

The Repubs are OK with all that and put no pressure on him to desist from that behaviour? 

My sense is that Republicans feel it is better to be in the drivers seat of a car without any brakes than in the backseat of any type of vehicle. Long as their guy is President they control their own destiny even if that means driving straight off a cliff. 

8 minutes ago, geordief said:

Is it his right as President to do that?

Trump has changed the common understanding of what is or isn't right fora President to do. In the past Presidents had made their Tax Returns public, disassociated themselves from businesses, avoided nepotism, and etc. It is up to Congress to check the power of a President and because they haven't laws like Emoluments Clause have proven to be insignificant at dealing with this specific President.

Take federal Nepotism laws:

Quote

 

Federal law, at 5 U.S.C. § 3110, generally prohibits a federal official, including a Member of Congress, from appointing, promoting, or recommending for appointment or promotion any “relative” of the official to any agency or department over which the official exercises authority or control.  The statute defines a relative, for these purposes, as "an individual who is related to the public official as father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, or half sister."

https://ethics.house.gov/staff-rights-and-duties/nepotism  

 

 Trump's work around for having both his Daughter and son-in-law working in the White House is that neither receive pay. They are "volunteers" so the federal law against Nepotism doesn't apply to them. Clearly what Trump is doing violates the goal of the law. 

[geordief]

8 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

I was aware that Trump had met with Putin without advisers present but it is new information (at least to me) that Trump destroyed his interpreters notes. 

He does however I am not sure which specific ones you are referencing. 

I  can't remember which it was

My sense is that Republicans feel it is better to be in the drivers seat of a car without any brakes than in the backseat of any type of vehicle. Long as their guy is President they control their own destiny even if that means driving straight off a cliff. 

There has to be some rationale.It feels like  collective dereliction of duty to me.

Quote

Trump has changed the common understanding of what is or isn't right fora President to do. In the past Presidents had made their Tax Returns public, disassociated themselves from businesses, avoided nepotism, and etc. It is up to Congress to check the power of a President and because they haven't laws like Emoluments Clause have proven to be insignificant at dealing with this specific President.

Take federal Nepotism laws:

 Trump's work around for having both his Daughter and son-in-law working in the White House is that neither receive pay. They are "volunteers" so the federal law against Nepotism doesn't apply to them. Clearly what Trump is doing violates the goal of the law. 

Can Congress address that now ? Will the Senate  object?

Edited January 13, 2019 by geordief

[Ten oz]

3 minutes ago, geordief said:

Can Congress address that now ? Will the Senate  object?

Republicans still control the Senate and kill any legislation which Trump objects to. 

This unfortunately isn't new. George Washington himself warned against putting party over country. Trump is merely the most extreme version of this we've seen since the end of the Civil War.  

Quote

In contemplating the causes, which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern, that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by Geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavour to excite a belief, that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence, within particular districts, is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heart-burnings, which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those, who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them every thing they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the union by which they were procured? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren, and connect them with aliens? Link

 

[geordief]

5 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Republicans still control the Senate and kill any legislation which Trump objects to. 

This unfortunately isn't new. George Washington himself warned against putting party over country. Trump is merely the most extreme version of this we've seen since the end of the Civil War.  

 

I am not well versed in American history but the present political divide between the "two tribes" (Reps and Dems) seems a little different from the geographical differences brought up by GW

(although the Dems are stronger on the E/W Coasts of course).

 

I find myself wishing for a new divide between young and old where the old should learn a few new manners  and  get off the proverbial jon  since the young ,at this stage have a clearer stake in the well being of the country  -they ,and their children are in it for the long haul.

 

Cannot be confident how beneficial such a theoretical  transfer of influence would actually  be but it would surely address climate change policy ,which I place at the top of the list of the current "derelictions of duty"

[Ten oz]

2 minutes ago, geordief said:

I am not well versed in American history but the present political divide between the "two tribes" (Reps and Dems) seems a little different from the geographical differences brought up by GW

(although the Dems are stronger on the E/W Coasts of course).

Not really. Currently every major metro in the U.S.overwhelming is Democrat and every rural area is Republican. Even in Texas, a state known as a Republican stronghold, all the major cities (San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, Austin, El Paso, etc) vote Democrat. 

6 minutes ago, geordief said:

I find myself wishing for a new divide between young and old where the old should learn a few new manners  and  get off the proverbial jon  since the young ,at this stage have a clearer stake in the well being of the country  -they ,and their children are in it for the long haul.

 

Cannot be confident how beneficial such a theoretical  transfer of influence would actually  be but it would surely address climate change policy ,which I place at the top of the list of the current "derelictions of duty"

I personally feel Republicans take advantage of people's common understand of political divides to justify their bad behavior. Rather than people seeing in Trump and the Republican's who protect him criminal behavior (Mueller already has indicted or gotten guilty pleas from 33 people and counting) they see two party division. It is Democrats vs Republican and not a criminal POTUS willfully breaking the law. Many people reflexively feel it makes them partisan to take sides and Republicans exploit that to behavior in a manner far worse than the other side would ever consider.

No one in the Obama administration was ever found guilty of a crime.  Despite countless investigations into Hillary Clinton that dragged on for years she was never shown to have committed a crime or implicated by a guilty party to have participated in a crime. Within the division between the two parties only one side can be objectively shown to be behaving criminally.

[Ten oz]

Trump on lawyer Giuliani no longer denies collusion. Now that it is undeniable that Trump's campaign committed crimes Guiliani is shifting the goals posts. 

Quote

 

Rudy Giuliani, the lawyer of U.S.President Donald Trump, said he's never categorically stated that Trump's campaign did not collude with Russia— taking another step away from the president's repeated stance of "no collusion."

"I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign. I have no idea," he said. "I said the president of the United States — there is not a single bit of evidence the president of the United States committed the only crime you could commit here: Conspired with the Russians to hack the DNC."

Link

 

 

[geordief]

34 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Trump on lawyer Giuliani no longer denies collusion. Now that it is undeniable that Trump's campaign committed crimes Guiliani is shifting the goals posts. 

 

Giuliani has "gone native" . He seems not to appreciate what a nadir of decent behaviour such limited admission show.

 

If his limited admission (he is Trump's lawyer it seems) was all  that there was to it it would of itself be enough to damn anyone in Trump's shoes  for their lack of reaction or apparent genuine concern to this point.

If ,of course there is more to it (as common sense would suggest) we would have our answer to the reason for this lack of concern.

And the Republican part is still functioning as a firewall.....

Edited January 17, 2019 by geordief

[J.C.MacSwell]

46 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Trump on lawyer Giuliani no longer denies collusion. Now that it is undeniable that Trump's campaign committed crimes Guiliani is shifting the goals posts. 

 

A  little more context:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/16/politics/rudy-giuliani-cnntv/index.html

Keep in mind this is coming from CNN.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/giuliani-claims-i-never-said-there-was-no-collusion-in-trump-campaign

Keep in mind this is coming from Fox News.

[Ten oz]

12 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

A  little more context:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/16/politics/rudy-giuliani-cnntv/index.html

Keep in mind this is coming from CNN.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/giuliani-claims-i-never-said-there-was-no-collusion-in-trump-campaign

Keep in mind this is coming from Fox News.

More context? I have seen Guiliani speaking on this issue with my own 2 eyes. I do not need CNN or Fox punditry to frame it for me. Manafort, Trump's from campaign manager, has been proved guilty in a court of law. It is a fact Trump's campaign worked with Russian officials. 

The Russian lawyer Trump Jr and Kushner met with during the campaign at Trump Tower has been charged.

Link

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

More context? I have seen Guiliani speaking on this issue with my own 2 eyes. I do not need CNN or Fox punditry to frame it for me. Manafort, Trump's from campaign manager, has been proved guilty in a court of law. It is a fact Trump's campaign worked with Russian officials. 

More than in the link you provided, yes. That post wasn't solely for you either.

 

You may claim you do not need CNN, but you provided a link from them as the original source.

[swansont]

On 1/13/2019 at 7:54 AM, Ten oz said:

Trump has changed the common understanding of what is or isn't right fora President to do. In the past Presidents had made their Tax Returns public, disassociated themselves from businesses, avoided nepotism, and etc. It is up to Congress to check the power of a President and because they haven't laws like Emoluments Clause have proven to be insignificant at dealing with this specific President.

Or he hasn’t, and what he is doing is wrong, and his party is complicit in these actions.

e.g. a police officer who takes a bribe to look the other way isn’t changing the common understanding of what is right in law enforcement. They are simply corrupt, and breaking the law.

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

Or he hasn’t, and what he is doing is wrong, and his party is complicit in these actions.

e.g. a police officer who takes a bribe to look the other way isn’t changing the common understanding of what is right in law enforcement. They are simply corrupt, and breaking the law.

Does everyone know the police officer is doing this, or just half the police force?

Or do some just suspect it? Should they wait for an investigation to be completed, or just assume the worst?

If the officer wasn't a rude and obnoxious individual would the facts appear different for her?

[Ten oz]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You may claim you do not need CNN, but you provided a link from them as the original source.

The interview where Guiliani made the remarks was a CNN interview. So that just is what it is. However it is what Guiliani said and not which outlet he said it on that I am focusing on. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

4 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

The interview where Guiliani made the remarks was a CNN interview. So that just is what it is. However it is what Guiliani said and not which outlet he said it on that I am focusing on. 

Without the broader context of Cuomo's questions and insinuations?

[Ten oz]

48 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Should they wait for an investigation to be completed, or just assume the worst?

Members of Trump's campaign like Flynn and Manafort have already been proved guilty. At this point it is accurate to state Trump's campaign violated the law. It is beyond being merely an assumption. It is fact. The only questions which remain deal with depth of involvement from Trump himself. 

 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Does everyone know the police officer is doing this, or just half the police force?

Does it matter? The law is the law.

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Or do some just suspect it? Should they wait for an investigation to be completed, or just assume the worst?

We already know enough. People have pled guilty and given evidence. The investigation will show more, not less.

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

If the officer wasn't a rude and obnoxious individual would the facts appear different for her?

Why would that matter?

[J.C.MacSwell]

19 minutes ago, swansont said:

Does it matter? The law is the law.

We already know enough. People have pled guilty and given evidence. The investigation will show more, not less.

Why would that matter?

You seem to think it is a foregone conclusion that Trump is guilty. (correct me if I'm wrong)

Based on what you are so sure you know.

Why does the investigation continue, if it already has all the information it needs confirmed to prove Trump is guilty of enough crimes to expel him from office?

Why would they allow him any more time leading your Country?

 

[StringJunky]

12 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You seem to think it is a foregone conclusion that Trump is guilty. (correct me if I'm wrong)

Based on what you are so sure you know.

Why does the investigation continue, if it already has all the information it needs confirmed to prove Trump is guilty of enough crimes to expel him from office?

Why would they allow him any more time leading your Country?

 

I think Mueller is building as water-tight a case as possible. Another little nugget out today:

Quote

Michael Cohen, U.S. President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, said on Thursday he paid a firm to manipulate online polling data “at the direction of and for the sole benefit of” Trump.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-cohen/ex-trump-lawyer-rigging-polls-was-at-the-direction-of-trump-idUSKCN1PB1PZ