Ten oz Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 Just now, Huckleberry of Yore said: Perhaps. But the consensus I've observed is that the Clinton impeachment was a net loser for the opposition; Clinton didn't seem to be hurt by it. Republicans won the following Presidental election didn't they? Not only that but Republicans trotted out Monica Lewinsky arguments to rip Hillary Clinton with. So they got decades of mileage out of it. If Republicans had the impeachment to do again they'd be foolish to change a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry of Yore Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 6 minutes ago, Ten oz said: Republicans won the following Presidental election didn't they? Not only that but Republicans trotted out Monica Lewinsky arguments to rip Hillary Clinton with. So they got decades of mileage out of it. If Republicans had the impeachment to do again they'd be foolish to change a thing. You appear to know more about political strategy than I do. But it suggests that Pelosi should waste no time proceeding with impeachment. Given recent gains by Republicans in the Senate, there's little chance of removing Trump. But if you're right, the democrats would be foolish not to move forward regardless. But I'll reiterate that at this point Russian collusion is very unlikely to be the star attraction in the impeachment articles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 5 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said: You appear to know more about political strategy than I do. But it suggests that Pelosi should waste no time proceeding with impeachment. Given recent gains by Republicans in the Senate, there's little chance of removing Trump. But if you're right, the democrats would be foolish not to move forward regardless. But I'll reiterate that at this point Russian collusion is very unlikely to be the star attraction in the impeachment articles. Whether Trump obstructed justice, will be impeached, should be impeached, colluded with Russia, broke the emoluments clause, and etc, etc, etc are all things which may or may not be dealt with independently. Nothing on the investigation side will force an impeachment vote in Congress. If they choose Congress could start impeachment hearings tomorrow. The two can happen in parallel or series. The Special Counsels Investigation and Impeachment are separate processes. I have no idea whether or not Congress will impeach Trump. I am not arguing I think they will. Rather I am pionting out that arguments that they'd pay a political price if they did don't seem to be rooted in any sort precedent. As for Collusion between Russia and Trump's campaign evidence and court proceedings have already proved it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry of Yore Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 42 minutes ago, Ten oz said: As for Collusion between Russia and Trump's campaign evidence and court proceedings have already proved it happened. None of the defendants you cited have been convicted of anything related to Russian meddling. Flynn might have lied about talking to an ambassador. Meh. The DOJ has indicted Russian agents, but it was explicitly said that those indictments had no involvement by the Trump campaign, or any American citizens at all. Perhaps you could list the pertinent specifics of the proceedings you cited. But like Strzok I'm pretty sure there is no there there. And, I'll bet the 50th draft of impeachment articles has been written already. I don't really care, but part of me says, go ahead, roll the dice. The recent tit-for-tat between Trump and Pelosi is so entertaining; why not have an all out street brawl. I can't wait for the circus to come to town. -4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 8 hours ago, Huckleberry of Yore said: None of the defendants you cited have been convicted of anything related to Russian meddling. And Capone wasn't convicted of murder. 8 hours ago, Huckleberry of Yore said: Flynn might have lied about talking to an ambassador. Meh. Collusion. Meh. 8 hours ago, Huckleberry of Yore said: The DOJ has indicted Russian agents, but it was explicitly said that those indictments had no involvement by the Trump campaign, or any American citizens at all. No, they were indicted for the DNC hack, but that information never made it to the US, right? Oh, wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 12 hours ago, Ten oz said: Republicans won the following Presidental election didn't they? Not only that but Republicans trotted out Monica Lewinsky arguments to rip Hillary Clinton with. So they got decades of mileage out of it. If Republicans had the impeachment to do again they'd be foolish to change a thing. By a thread (chad?) and lost the popular vote. I doubt they would choose to handle it exactly the way they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 3 hours ago, swansont said: And Capone wasn't convicted of murder. And I just read something which pointed out that Mueller had Cohen plead guilty to lying to congress, which is what the recent news report on suborning perjury was about. Which makes sense to do if you know you have that charge lined up and ready to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 And there is a report indicating that Trump may have directed Cohen to lie to congress, which would be obstruction of justice: Quote President Donald Trump directed his longtime attorney Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about negotiations to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, according to two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter. Trump also supported a plan, set up by Cohen, to visit Russia during the presidential campaign, in order to personally meet President Vladimir Putin and jump-start the tower negotiations. “Make it happen,” the sources said Trump told Cohen. And even as Trump told the public he had no business deals with Russia, the sources said Trump and his children Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. received regular, detailed updates about the real estate development from Cohen, whom they put in charge of the project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said: By a thread (chad?) and lost the popular vote. I doubt they would choose to handle it exactly the way they did. A win is a win. By an inch or a mile Bush became POTUS. Who is to say All Gore wouldn't have gotten more votes had the impeachment never happened? The result was positive for the GOP. Impeaching Clinton did not cause them to lose. Nor did impeachment motions against Nixon cause Democrats to lose. There is no modern. Precedent o e can point to which would indicate impeaching Trump would cause Democrats to lose in 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 4 hours ago, CharonY said: And there is a report indicating that Trump may have directed Cohen to lie to congress, which would be obstruction of justice: Must be serious. Trump now seeking a summit with KimJong Un...no doubt wants advice on setting up a dictatorship: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/pompeo-kim-yong-chol-north-korea-washington/index.html ...might have had enough of this "checks and balance" thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Trump now seeking a summit with KimJong Un...no doubt wants advice on setting up a dictatorship: Or, he's trying to distract once again from the news cycle that makes him look bad by forcing a story into the headlines that he thinks will be bigger... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 4 hours ago, iNow said: Or, he's trying to distract once again from the news cycle that makes him look bad by forcing a story into the headlines that he thinks will be bigger... This was my immediate thought. Plain as day. There is no depth this man won't stoop to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 minute ago, StringJunky said: This was my immediate thought. Plain as day. There is no depth this man won't stoop to. Indeed, but what troubles me more is how many millions of my fellow citizens agree with and choose to enable him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, iNow said: Indeed, but what troubles me more is how many millions of my fellow citizens agree with and choose to enable him. This is the problem: what will it take? When it hits them in the pocket, I suppose. I'm pretty sure his presidency is going to end in disgrace though. My hunch is that Mueller knows how bad he is and won't let go, if he''s allowed to, until he's nailed him. I think the investigation has been running for far too long for the accusations against Trump to be tenuous. Edited January 19, 2019 by StringJunky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 4 hours ago, iNow said: Or, he's trying to distract once again from the news cycle that makes him look bad by forcing a story into the headlines that he thinks will be bigger... Apparently this time it was the fake news cycle, but that was actual my thought also. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/mueller-statement-buzzfeed/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangerx Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 6 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Apparently this time it was the fake news cycle, but that was actual my thought also. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/mueller-statement-buzzfeed/index.html Mueller's spokesperson claimed the Buzzfeed report was not accurate. That does not make the story fake, but something about is incorrect. Buzzfeed disputes the statement, standing on evidence collected by law enforcement personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 15 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Apparently this time it was the fake news cycle 3 minutes ago, rangerx said: Mueller's spokesperson claimed the Buzzfeed report was not accurate. That does not make the story fake, but something about is incorrect. Specifically, there were details included that were not fully accurate, but the core underlying claims remain unchallenged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 It is a but cryptic and it is not clear what is being disputed. The push back is notable in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordief Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 5 hours ago, CharonY said: It is a but cryptic and it is not clear what is being disputed. The push back is notable in itself. Seems like the investigation is protecting itself (for good reason). The ambiguity is good .If we were to get a full window into any one area of the investigation it could compromise it (maybe not immediately but down the road) This was such a significant story that it seems to have justified the investigation showing its hand -hopefully to the least extent possible. The previous story (Giuliani admitting "collusion" occurred in the campaign was devastating enough anyway and seems to highlight the present POTUS' disregard for the democratic process and security related issues of the USA (as if this was not already apparent) It is to be hoped that Mueller's final report will establish that some aspects to all this were not as bad as feared but even that will be small consolation for what is already known (ad nauseam) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 10 hours ago, iNow said: Specifically, there were details included that were not fully accurate, but the core underlying claims remain unchallenged. They said description, and characterization of documents, was not accurate. Whatever that means, I'm sure you would agree that coming from the Special Counsel is probably significant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 The quote is, "BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the special counsel's office and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office regarding Michael Cohen's congressional testimony are not accurate." It’s obviously open for interpretation and unlikely to be a fruitful discussion until more is shared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 Trump called reports he was clashing with his Sec of State Rex Tillerson "Fake News" pretty much right up to the time he fired him. Likewise Trump and his supporters attacked reports regarding his rocky relationships with Preibus, Kelly, Session, McMaster, and Mattis. Trump also called initial reports about Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal "Fake News". It seems that most of the time something is labelled as "fake news" by the Trump administration it is definitely true. As this relates to Russia and Collusion the trend is for Trump to deny everything as "Fake News" and re-position the argument to be about something. Regarding Michael Flynn who has since plead guilty to numerous felons related to Russia Trump argued he only fired Flynn because he lied to Mike Pence. To this day,even as Flynn awaits sentencing, Trump has never acknowledge Flynn broke the law. Trump continues to deny the knowledge of the Trump Tower meeting while also insisting it was no big deal with tweets saying: "Fake News reporting, a complete fabrication, that I am concerned about the meeting my wonderful son, Donald, had in Trump Tower. This was a meeting to get information on an opponent, totally legal and done all the time in politics - and it went nowhere. I did not know about it!" Meanwhile the Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya charged and shown to have connections to Russian Intelligence and Manafort (who was also at the meeting) has been proven to have Russian Intelligence ties. So much stuff happens it is tough to even keep straight but there is one consistent thing; if Trump calls it "fake news" it is most likely TRUE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Ten oz said: Trump called reports he was clashing with his Sec of State Rex Tillerson "Fake News" pretty much right up to the time he fired him. Likewise Trump and his supporters attacked reports regarding his rocky relationships with Preibus, Kelly, Session, McMaster, and Mattis. Trump also called initial reports about Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal "Fake News". It seems that most of the time something is labelled as "fake news" by the Trump administration it is definitely true. As this relates to Russia and Collusion the trend is for Trump to deny everything as "Fake News" and re-position the argument to be about something. Regarding Michael Flynn who has since plead guilty to numerous felons related to Russia Trump argued he only fired Flynn because he lied to Mike Pence. To this day,even as Flynn awaits sentencing, Trump has never acknowledge Flynn broke the law. Trump continues to deny the knowledge of the Trump Tower meeting while also insisting it was no big deal with tweets saying: "Fake News reporting, a complete fabrication, that I am concerned about the meeting my wonderful son, Donald, had in Trump Tower. This was a meeting to get information on an opponent, totally legal and done all the time in politics - and it went nowhere. I did not know about it!" Meanwhile the Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya charged and shown to have connections to Russian Intelligence and Manafort (who was also at the meeting) has been proven to have Russian Intelligence ties. So much stuff happens it is tough to even keep straight but there is one consistent thing; if Trump calls it "fake news" it is most likely TRUE. ...and it would be much easier to see that, if there was less news with such obvious bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 (edited) 19 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: ...and it would be much easier to see that, if there was less news with such obvious bias. Media is consumed al la carte. This isn't the 50's where everyone is getting news from the same 3 sources. You have control over which media outlets you choose to consume. If you are regularly coming across news you feel is inaccurate or bias I believe its a user error problem. The internet is the best platform the world has ever had for researching information. If you don't want bias news just stop following news you think is bias and focus your attention on news you feel isn't bias. Trump lies. Trump lies at levels never seen from a POTUS before. I believe that to be a fact everyone concedes. Some media outlets are more confrontational or disturbed than others when dealing with the way they report on those lies but that doesn't change the fact that Trump is a compulsive liar. It also doesn't change the fact that his campaign committed crimes. Edited January 19, 2019 by Ten oz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangerx Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 23 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: ...and it would be much easier to see that, if there was less news with such obvious bias. When the president says something stupid every day, then the media reports it verbatim, how can that be bias? 13 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Apparently this time it was the fake news cycle, but that was actual my thought also. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/18/politics/mueller-statement-buzzfeed/index.html Not reporting would be suppression or censorship. Reporting only the positive issues is propaganda. The desperation for a gotcha runs high in that camp. It's all they got, and little else. People are in jail and more are likely headed there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now