Trump

[shockmonster]

CNN is reporting that the Special Council can't get Trump on Collusion so they are changing course to Financial matters. This could develop into a big Constitutional Crisis and could get real ugly. There is no doubt that a group of elites want to impeach him. He has a large group of supporters who may believe that their vote is being nullified (maybe 35%)who feel he should be removed through an election.

[wufan]

CNN is reporting that the Special Council can't get Trump on Collusion so they are changing course to Financial matters. This could develop into a big Constitutional Crisis and could get real ugly. There is no doubt that a group of elites want to impeach him. He has a large group of supporters who may believe that their vote is being nullified (maybe 35%)who feel he should be removed through an election.

He's not a great representative of our country, but I'm yet to be convinced he should be removed from office.

[jdshock]

CNN is reporting that the Special Council can't get Trump on Collusion so they are changing course to Financial matters. This could develop into a big Constitutional Crisis and could get real ugly. There is no doubt that a group of elites want to impeach him. He has a large group of supporters who may believe that their vote is being nullified (maybe 35%)who feel he should be removed through an election.

People have been using the word "collusion" to mean any number of different things, since there's not really a crime by that name that he could've been guilty of. I wasn't watching so I don't know if that's your word or theirs, but investigations into collusion with Russia were always about either (a) finding out about other illegal activities stemming from the collusion or (b) about the collusion itself in the sense that it's probably worth knowing about, even if it was all legal.

I also think the phrase "changing course" implies a set back for the investigation. As in, didn't find anything let's try something else. I think the news about the grand jury implies the investigation is ramping up. It could be that it ultimately is in a different direction, but then it's like they hung a left and floored it.

[shockmonster]

People have been using the word "collusion" to mean any number of different things, since there's not really a crime by that name that he could've been guilty of. I wasn't watching so I don't know if that's your word or theirs, but investigations into collusion with Russia were always about either (a) finding out about other illegal activities stemming from the collusion or (b) about the collusion itself in the sense that it's probably worth knowing about, even if it was all legal.
Interests
I also think the phrase "changing course" implies a set back for the investigation. As in, didn't find anything let's try something else. I think the news about the grand jury implies the investigation is ramping up. It could be that it ultimately is in a different direction, but then it's like they hung a left and floored it.

All of the original reporting said that the Special Council was invoked to investigate laws broken regarding Russian meddling and/or collusion of the election with the Trump campaign. After the fact, it was added that obstruction of justice by Trump into this collusion would be looked at. Now they are looking into his financial interests. I predict that whatever they come up with will have nothing to do with the original premise. With all of the mistrust of a Washington and the wealthy elites who make large sums of money from being connected to the right people, this could evolve into a big constitutional mess. I would be fine with Pence but Many or maybe most of the 35% of his biggest supporters could care less about the Republican Party or the Democrat Part and I'm not sure what may happen next. We could be headed toward dangerous and unchartered waters.

[Play Angry]

Just depends on what he's done, if anything. Similar avenues were pursued in this one investigation in the 90s that went on forever.

If the rabbit holes expose infractions which are inconsequential, the storm will pass. If misdeeds are significant enough, he will pay. It will play out in time.

[shockmonster]

Just depends on what he's done, if anything. Similar avenues were pursued in this one investigation in the 90s that went on forever.

If the rabbit holes expose infractions which are inconsequential, the ctstorm will pass. If misdeeds are significant enough, he will pay. It will play out in time.

You haven't heard of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and his false prosecution of Scooter Libby to gain leverage against him in order to get at his boss (Cheney) and possibly find out about a conspiracy that could possibly get at VP Cheney and maybe even Pres. Bush. Fitzgerald actually had evidence that Richard Armitage (an aide of Colin Powell at State Dept.) was the leaker and not Libby, but he prosecuted ( and convicted) Libby anyway to get at (hopefully a conspiracy at the top levels)Cheney and then possibly Bush. This is a story about how political motivated goals can run amuck. If you think that Comey and by Connection, his good friend, Robert Mueller are incapable of a political witch hunt against someone they don't like (Trump), you have more trust in Washington than I. Trump isn't easy to like and most Washington operators don't like him.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-false-evidence-against-scooter-libby-1428365673

[ShockingButTrue]

You haven't heard of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and his false prosecution of Scooter Libby to gain leverage against him in order to get at his boss (Cheney) and possibly find out about a conspiracy that could possibly get at VP Cheney and maybe even Pres. Bush. Fitzgerald actually had evidence that Richard Armitage (an aide of Colin Powell at State Dept.) was the leaker and not Libby, but he prosecuted ( and convicted) Libby anyway to get at (hopefully a conspiracy at the top levels)Cheney and then possibly Bush. This is a story about how political motivated goals can run amuck. If you think that Comey and by Connection, his good friend, Robert Mueller are incapable of a political witch hunt against someone they don't like (Trump), you have more trust in Washington than I. Trump isn't easy to like and most Washington operators don't like him.

Clinton donors, most all of them. The battle rages on...

How deplorable!

[Play Angry]

You haven't heard of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and his false prosecution of Scooter Libby to gain leverage against him in order to get at his boss (Cheney) and possibly find out about a conspiracy that could possibly get at VP Cheney and maybe even Pres. Bush. Fitzgerald actually had evidence that Richard Armitage (an aide of Colin Powell at State Dept.) was the leaker and not Libby, but he prosecuted ( and convicted) Libby anyway to get at (hopefully a conspiracy at the top levels)Cheney and then possibly Bush. This is a story about how political motivated goals can run amuck. If you think that Comey and by Connection, his good friend, Robert Mueller are incapable of a political witch hunt against someone they don't like (Trump), you have more trust in Washington than I. Trump isn't easy to like and most Washington operators don't like him.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fal...bby-1428365673

?

Yes, an investigation is dependent on the investigator adhering to certain ethical standards and not using it as a tool to illegally coerce the desired result. Mueller and his boss Rosenstein appear to be serious men with credible backgrounds, and attributing improper motive to both of them without evidence is improper.

The machine servicing half the country has been hard at work trying to discredit the investigation in the event of any adverse findings. The machine servicing the other half is busy imputing guilt from the existence of grand juries.

Most prefer to choose sides now since "wait and see" casts doubt on their preferred outcome, in either direction.

[jdshock]

All of the original reporting said that the Special Council was invoked to investigate laws broken regarding Russian meddling and/or collusion of the election with the Trump campaign. After the fact, it was added that obstruction of justice by Trump into this collusion would be looked at. Now they are looking into his financial interests. I predict that whatever they come up with will have nothing to do with the original premise. With all of the mistrust of a Washington and the wealthy elites who make large sums of money from being connected to the right people, this could evolve into a big constitutional mess. I would be fine with Pence but Many or maybe most of the 35% of his biggest supporters could care less about the Republican Party or the Democrat Part and I'm not sure what may happen next. We could be headed toward dangerous and unchartered waters.

Here's an article from June 15 that is already discussing the various directions the investigation would go. It specifically highlights obstruction of justice and financial crimes as a couple of the biggest areas that will be investigated. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017...-gets-personal

“The collusion and the money trail are potentially very closely related,” Zeidenberg says. “Everybody’s scratching their heads—why are the Trump people so nice to these Russian guys? ‘Cause there’s a bunch of billionaires over there, and a bunch of banks that lend money! Trump was in hock, he needed to be bailed out, people bailed him out, he doesn’t want us to see his taxes, what’s going on? One of Mueller’s operating theories will probably be that the Russians can provide a financial benefit to people.” Jack Goldsmith, a top Bush administration Justice Department official who worked with Mueller, is more cautious. “I don’t think you can infer anything from the hires about direction,” Goldsmith says. “But it sure seems like Mueller thinks he will be bringing some cases to the grand jury.”

I'm hearing a lot of people that believe the investigation basically pulled a 180 and is now going after financial information, which clearly makes the whole thing look like a witch hunt. That's obviously not the case. Financial crimes were always one of the biggest things the investigation was going to look at.

[ShockingButTrue]

?

Most prefer to choose sides now since "wait and see" casts doubt on their preferred outcome, in either direction.

Does the red mean KGB?

[shockmonster]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factcheck/trump-makes-false-claims-about-us-nuclear-arsenal/ar-AApMDG6?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

I really don't want to get into a big discussion again about Trump because I'm not really a big supporter (it sounds like I am but I'm really not) of his. But when the media goes crazy about something he says that isn't even controversial, I just have to say something. While I'm willing to occasionally say that Trump has stepped over the line with his tweets, etc., a few of you seem to be obligated to support the mainstream media even when they step over the line.

All Trump said was that we have more nuclear capability than ever before, and the news outlets accuse him of lying because he had nothing to do with increasing our capabilities during his 6 months as President. This is such a little thing and really has nothing to do with the message he and the NSC are sending out (to China as much as N. Korea).

In this case, when we should be bipartisan (both parties have said that we can't allow N. Korea to have a nuclear weapon that can reach the mainland, Hawaii, Alaska, California) in what is happening with North Korea because the last two administrations have been inept, allowed North Korea to continue their nuclear program. Clinton paid them a huge sum of money to stop their program and they didn't stop. Bush and Obama tried sanctions and it didn't stop their nuclear program. China continues to give N.K. the oil they need to continue even with the other sanctions.

Now, we are trying sanctions again but they are little different from the past. The leader just starves his people in order to continue to pay for the nuclear arsenal.

[CBB_Fan]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factch...cid=spartandhp

I really don't want to get into a big discussion again about Trump because I'm not really a big supporter (it sounds like I am but I'm really not) of his. But when the media goes crazy about something he says that isn't even controversial, I just have to say something. While I'm willing to occasionally say that Trump has stepped over the line with his tweets, etc., a few of you seem to be obligated to support the mainstream media even when they step over the line.

All Trump said was that we have more nuclear capability than ever before, and the news outlets accuse him of lying because he had nothing to do with increasing our capabilities during his 6 months as President. This is such a little thing and really has nothing to do with the message he and the NSC are sending out (to China as much as N. Korea).

In this case, when we should be bipartisan (both parties have said that we can't allow N. Korea to have a nuclear weapon that can reach the mainland, Hawaii, Alaska, California) in what is happening with North Korea because the last two administrations have been inept, allowed North Korea to continue their nuclear program. Clinton paid them a huge sum of money to stop their program and they didn't stop. Bush and Obama tried sanctions and it didn't stop their nuclear program. China continues to give N.K. the oil they need to continue even with the other sanctions.

Now, we are trying sanctions again but they are little different from the past. The leader just starves his people in order to continue to pay for the nuclear arsenal.

The simple fact of the matter is that Trump is a liar, not a person who lied. He lies both when it is consequential and when it is not, both when it benefits him and when it does not. His lies go beyond the standard for politics, and that alone says something. You might consider this to just a quirk of his, I consider it disqualifying. Societies are built on trust, we give the president the ability to destroy the world because of trust. A liar cannot be trusted. Every time Trump says something that is simply and easily proven to be untrue, he further builds the narrative that he cannot be trusted. And that happens literally daily.

If it gets to the point of nuclear confrontation, I would rather pick a random person off the street than have Trump deal with it. Man, woman, child, homeless; doesn't matter. I have more trust in the unknown than I do with Trump.

[jdshock]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factch...cid=spartandhp

I really don't want to get into a big discussion again about Trump because I'm not really a big supporter (it sounds like I am but I'm really not) of his. But when the media goes crazy about something he says that isn't even controversial, I just have to say something. While I'm willing to occasionally say that Trump has stepped over the line with his tweets, etc., a few of you seem to be obligated to support the mainstream media even when they step over the line.

All Trump said was that we have more nuclear capability than ever before, and the news outlets accuse him of lying because he had nothing to do with increasing our capabilities during his 6 months as President. This is such a little thing and really has nothing to do with the message he and the NSC are sending out (to China as much as N. Korea).

I agree that it's inconsequential, but you kind of ignore what Trump said. You say all he said was that it's better than ever. He literally said his first order as president was to improve it and now it's better than ever. He is taking credit for something he didn't do. It's inconsequential, but the media isn't wrong.

[Rocky Mountain Shock]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factch...cid=spartandhp

I really don't want to get into a big discussion again about Trump because I'm not really a big supporter (it sounds like I am but I'm really not) of his. But when the media goes crazy about something he says that isn't even controversial, I just have to say something. While I'm willing to occasionally say that Trump has stepped over the line with his tweets, etc., a few of you seem to be obligated to support the mainstream media even when they step over the line.

All Trump said was that we have more nuclear capability than ever before, and the news outlets accuse him of lying because he had nothing to do with increasing our capabilities during his 6 months as President. This is such a little thing and really has nothing to do with the message he and the NSC are sending out (to China as much as N. Korea).

In this case, when we should be bipartisan (both parties have said that we can't allow N. Korea to have a nuclear weapon that can reach the mainland, Hawaii, Alaska, California) in what is happening with North Korea because the last two administrations have been inept, allowed North Korea to continue their nuclear program. Clinton paid them a huge sum of money to stop their program and they didn't stop. Bush and Obama tried sanctions and it didn't stop their nuclear program. China continues to give N.K. the oil they need to continue even with the other sanctions.

Now, we are trying sanctions again but they are little different from the past. The leader just starves his people in order to continue to pay for the nuclear arsenal.

Well, actually, the article is correct. Trump did not just say "we have more nuclear capability than ever before." Let's look at what he did say.

His first sentence: "My first order as President was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal." Two things are wrong with this. First of all, his first EO was to direct Federal agencies to find ways to delay the economic burden of Obamacare, but that's besides the point.

His second sentence: "It is now far stronger and more powerful than ever before." The article points out in paragraph 6 that the nuclear arsenal is "more or less at the same level of strength as when Trump took office." So Trump's second statement is false.

And going back to his first sentence, Obama began the process of modernizing the nuclear arsenal in 2014. So even if there had been an increase in the arsenal's strength, Trump would have had nothing to do with it.

So there's all kinds of wrong with literally everything he said. And the news media is rightfully calling him on it.

As CBB said, this guy lies all. the. damn. time. And not just like a normal politician, who will twist the truth or tell half truths. Trump goes all in with ludicrous claims that have no basis in fact or reality. And he does it almost daily.

[pinstripers]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/annabel-scott/govt-employees-arrested-allegedly-selling-false-ids-illegal-aliens-voter