Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread II

Billy86

So James baker (the FBI's top lawyer) said the other day that he was witness to Trump asking for Comey's loyalty. Oh, and he's magically been "reassigned" in the last 24 hours.

That's not the only one, they're also working on 'getting' the FBI deputy director... Elijah Cummings (Dem, house of Reps, Maryland) has come out and called it for what it is: https://democrats-oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/cummings-issues-statement-on-emergency-interview-of-fbi-deputy-director

Washington, D.C. (Dec. 21, 2017)—Today, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, issued the following statement in response to the emergency interview Republicans called this morning with Andrew McCabe, the Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), less than 48 hours after he appeared before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence:

Republican conspiracy theories that the FBI threw the election in favor of Hillary Clinton are contradicted by basic reality. The FBI re-opened the Clinton investigation just days before the election and announced it to the world despite the fact that they subsequently found nothing criminal. At the same time, the FBI had an ongoing investigation of President Trump, his campaign, and the Russians, but they did not make this key fact known to the American people before the election.

Everyone knows exactly what the Republicans are doing here. They are terrified that Special Counsel Mueller is getting closer to the truth and that he already has guilty pleas in hand. They know Michael Flynn cut a deal and there could be more coming very soon. So they are desperately trying to protect President Trump by attacking the credibility of Special Counsel Mueller, the Justice Department, and the FBI.

We know how this works because this is exactly what the Republicans did in Benghazi. We now have three committees in the House investigating—Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight—and that doesn’t even count the secret investigation being conducted by Chairman Nunes that was reported yesterday. The Senate Judiciary Committee and the Justice Department Inspector General are also investigating the same thing.

So that’s five or six different entities investigating. Does this sound familiar? Just like Benghazi, we know the Republican playbook. They admitted that their whole goal with Benghazi was to bring down Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers. Here they are trying to undermine confidence in the Special Counsel’s investigation.

But they won’t lift a finger to actually investigate the real abuses. They won’t request even a single scrap of paper from the White House about Michael Flynn, his security clearance, his foreign contacts, or his work with Russia to build nuclear reactors in the Middle East—none of it. Instead, Chairman Gowdy sent me a letter saying the Oversight Committee would not examine these abuses because it is not a “prudent” use of taxpayer dollars.

In today’s interview, Republicans grilled Deputy Director McCabe in an all-day session for the second time in just three days. They demanded today’s emergency interview on Tuesday night—literally while Chairman Gowdy was in a room already questioning Deputy Director McCabe for hours as part of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation.

I believe the Republicans were completely surprised and taken aback when Deputy Director McCabe immediately agreed to their demands for yet another emergency interview this morning. I cannot discuss the substance, but I can say that he showed everyone in that room today—with his answers to question after question—that he is a man of great patriotism, integrity, and honor. Like Sally Yates, Robert Mueller and many others, Deputy Director McCabe is a guardian of democracy, and we need more people like him in public service.

The oath we take as Members of Congress is not to Donald Trump—it is to the Constitution of the United States. I believe the Republicans in Congress have either forgotten that vow, or they are forsaking it.

FreudianSlippers

The most pathetic thing about this US/UN childishness is that the US had a party for the 9 nations that voted with them.

Professor Moriarty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The most pathetic thing about this US/UN childishness is that the US had a party for the 9 nations that voted with them.

Presumably everyone went home with a goodie bag.

Phonehead

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The most pathetic thing about this US/UN childishness is that the US had a party for the 9 nations that voted with them.

:D I thought you were joking but apparently this is 100% correct! What a truly bizarre act of childishness.

aloyisious

There's an item on the net to the effect that Rod Rosenstein OK'd the release by the DOJ on the 12 Dec of some anti-Trump texts by two FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page to ease his passage before a House Judiciary Committee hours later and appease the Pro-Trump people. It was rumoured that Don is unhappy with Rod because of Rob Mueller's investigative work. With Jeff Sessions recused Rod is the person to have to actually fire Mr Mueller.

The item speculates that If Don fires Rod he could replace him with a person more likely to do his bidding, rid him of Mr Mueller.

The main title over the item is: Russia probe may depend on one man. And it's not Mueller. Rod's photo is over the title. Opening the link provides another similar title: The fate of the Trump-Russia probe may depend on one man. And it’s not Mueller.

Unortunately I'm unable to copy the link to post it here... There's a possible source title/link - Vox Com - followed by a large yellow V at the base of the item.

For Forks Sake

Phonehead wrote: »

:D I thought you were joking but apparently this is 100% correct! What a truly bizarre act of childishness.

I was also sceptical, but here we are, utterly pathetic.

That's going to be one sparsely attended party mind.

http://www.newsweek.com/us-party-united-nations-jerusalem-vote-756636

Manic Moran

Creol1 wrote: »

I also can never get over how the UN is headquartered in New York. Somewhere such as Geneva would be far more appropriate.

At the time, it was pretty much the best option going. Towns like London and Paris were still getting over the war. Stockholm is would be a little inconvenient to get to, as would, say, Sydney. New York was well located, was well way from any likely conflict spots which might require UN intervention, the US had a well respected position in the world, and New York could easily accommodate. Not many other countries could do that. Maybe Montreal.

Switzerland was a non-starter as Switzerland wasn’t in the UN at the time. Wasn’t until 2002 that they joined.

PopePalpatine

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Presumably everyone went home with a goodie bag.

They probably included vouchers for Trump hotels.

Mr.Micro

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The most pathetic thing about this US/UN childishness is that the US had a party for the 9 nations that voted with them.

If you can't have real friends, then the next best thing to buy them.

Mr.Micro

aloyisious wrote: »

There's an item on the net to the effect that Rod Rosenstein OK'd the release by the DOJ on the 12 Dec of some anti-Trump texts by two FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page to ease his passage before a House Judiciary Committee hours later and appease the Pro-Trump people. It was rumoured that Don is unhappy with Rod because of Rob Mueller's investigative work. With Jeff Sessions recused Rod is the person to have to actually fire Mr Mueller.

The item speculates that If Don fires Rod he could replace him with a person more likely to do his bidding, rid him of Mr Mueller.

The main title over the item is: Russia probe may depend on one man. And it's not Mueller. Rod's photo is over the title. Opening the link provides another similar title: The fate of the Trump-Russia probe may depend on one man. And it’s not Mueller.

Unortunately I'm unable to copy the link to post it here... There's a possible source title/link - Vox Com - followed by a large yellow V at the base of the item.

The so called greatest Democracy on earth, and one man can do as he likes, be unaccountable for his actions. If he gets investigated, he can just change the investigators to more sympathetic people.. One would have thought the Americans would have learned after Nixon. Not happened yet, but most likely on the cards Trump vs Mueller. It's a ridiculous state of affairs that the guy being investigated controls the investigation....pure farce.

Tell me how

PopePalpatine wrote:

They probably included vouchers for Trump hotels.

Vouchers with 1 or 2% off mind.

But there's a surcharge to use the voucher of........1 or 2%.

Tell me how

Mr.Micro wrote:

The so called greatest Democracy on earth, and one man can do as he likes, be unaccountable for his actions. If he gets investigated, he can just change the investigators to more sympathetic people.. One would have thought the Americans would have learned after Nixon. Not happened yet, but most likely on the cards Trump vs Mueller. It's a ridiculous state of affairs that the guy being investigated controls the investigation....pure farce.

It really is laughable. What I find very strange is the absence of non-typical discourse around it.

Most people seem to respond in the way you would expect their demographic to do.

The media analysis of this is like the after game studio analysis of a football match being carried out by 2 fans from the terraces. They're too partisan.

I'd love to see a measured debate of the merits of his presidency after 1 year but you don't get that too often.

They need a BBC over there.

aloyisious

This Vox report has the Don thinking of firing Rod Rosenstein mentioned about two-third ways down on the link using the grey scrolling bar on the right as an indicator.

Link: https://www.vox.com/world/2017/12/18/16789976/trump-mueller-russia-coup-fox-news

Trump is unhappy with the only guy who can fire Mueller
You can add Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Trump’s naughty list for the holidays.
According to the Washington Post, Trump recently talked to his advisers about how much he doesn’t like Rosenstein, going so far as to call him “weak” and “a Democrat,” even though Rosenstein is a Republican.
Trump’s displeasure with Rosenstein has potentially big implications: Rosenstein is widely seen as the only government official with the ability to fire Mueller. And just last week, Rosenstein told the House Judiciary Committee that he sees no reason to fire Mueller at this point — implying that, at least for now, Mueller is safe.
But if Trump were to fire Rosenstein, that could pave the way for Trump to try to replace him with someone who is more willing to dismiss Mueller on his own behalf. Depending on how far down the line of succession he has to go to find someone willing to do that, it could potentially spark a massive political crisis where the president hires and fires people based on their willingness to help protect him from a criminal investigation.
That’s a scary prospect. But based on the Post story, there is a slight chance of that possibility becoming a reality.

Professor Moriarty

aloyisious wrote: »

This Vox report has the Don thinking of firing Rod Rosenstein mentioned about two-third ways down on the link using the grey scrolling bar on the right as an indicator.

Link: https://www.vox.com/world/2017/12/18/16789976/trump-mueller-russia-coup-fox-news

Trump is unhappy with the only guy who can fire Mueller
You can add Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to Trump’s naughty list for the holidays.
According to the Washington Post, Trump recently talked to his advisers about how much he doesn’t like Rosenstein, going so far as to call him “weak” and “a Democrat,” even though Rosenstein is a Republican.
Trump’s displeasure with Rosenstein has potentially big implications: Rosenstein is widely seen as the only government official with the ability to fire Mueller. And just last week, Rosenstein told the House Judiciary Committee that he sees no reason to fire Mueller at this point — implying that, at least for now, Mueller is safe.
But if Trump were to fire Rosenstein, that could pave the way for Trump to try to replace him with someone who is more willing to dismiss Mueller on his own behalf. Depending on how far down the line of succession he has to go to find someone willing to do that, it could potentially spark a massive political crisis where the president hires and fires people based on their willingness to help protect him from a criminal investigation.
That’s a scary prospect. But based on the Post story, there is a slight chance of that possibility becoming a reality.

James Comey might stick his hand up.

Hande hoche!

Seems that the rumour of Trump planning on firing Mueller yesterday was spread by House Democrats.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-firing-russia-investigation-special-counsel-us-constitution-senator-mark-a8121801.html

Still impressed that Jeff Sessions is hanging on.

Walter Bishop

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-republican-grovelling-at-the-white-house-was-an-alarm-call-for-2018

What the hell is this, this sort of toadying is beyond ludicrous:

“This has been a year of extraordinary accomplishment for the Trump Administration,” Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, said. “Thank you, Mr. President, for all you are doing.” Paul Ryan, the House Speaker, added that passing the tax bill “could not have been done without exquisite Presidential leadership.” Senator Orrin Hatch, of Utah, spoke directly to Trump, saying, “You are one heckuva leader, and we’re all benefitting from it.” And Congresswoman Diane Black, of Tennessee, put it even more bluntly. “Thank you, President Trump, for allowing us to have you as our President,” she said.

'Allowing' us to have you as our President...

Of course there's also the ultra-classy Trump Presidential coin: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/us/trump-presidential-coin.html

Creol1

http://twitter.com/JohnCleese/status/943566830362419202

ECO_Mental

Walter Bishop wrote: »

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-republican-grovelling-at-the-white-house-was-an-alarm-call-for-2018


Of course there's also the ultra-classy Trump Presidential coin: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/23/us/trump-presidential-coin.html

If you think that is classy check out the "yuge" christmass card he sent out..:P

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5206745/amp/Donald-Trump-hands-YUGE-Christmas-Card.html

Classy is not what you would call Trump....sad

Ellian

ECO_Mental wrote: »

If you think that is classy check out the "yuge" christmass card he sent out..:P

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5206745/amp/Donald-Trump-hands-YUGE-Christmas-Card.html

Classy is not what you would call Trump....sad

Bit off topic but if that is Melania's signature, her hand writing looks incredibly similar to Mr. Trumps. If I was betting, I'd say he didn't get an auto scribe template done for her, and if that's the case, I don't see any version of that story that would reflect well on him.

Igotadose

Even Trump couldn't be so stupid as to say the things he's been reported as to having said in June, that Haitian immigrants all have AIDS and Nigerians live in huts? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/23/politics/donald-trump-oval-office-immigration/index.html

Wait... this is Trump... there's no meaning to 'too stupid.'

Oh, and how Team Trump does surveys. This one attempts to rate Trump's first year in office vs. Obama's. "Poor" is only a choice under Obama. Hilarious: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/trump-invites-america-to-rate-his-and-obamas-presidencies-with-unimpeachably-evenhanded-survey.html

volchitsa

Ellian wrote: »

Bit off topic but if that is Melania's signature, her hand writing looks incredibly similar to Mr. Trumps. If I was betting, I'd say he didn't get an auto scribe template done for her, and if that's the case, I don't see any version of that story that would reflect well on him.

There was some talk about this a few months ago, it seems she may have modeled her signature on his afaicr. Unless your theory about them having a single template explains that earlier incident too. It's possible.

Billy86

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Seems that the rumour of Trump planning on firing Mueller yesterday was spread by House Democrats.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-firing-russia-investigation-special-counsel-us-constitution-senator-mark-a8121801.html

Still impressed that Jeff Sessions is hanging on.

I'm not sure how that shows what you say it does - the rumour wasn't from Dec 20th when Warner's comments and tweets were from - it's been going on for several weeks prior with the likes of FOX the primary people pushing it (which Warner repeatedly referenced). Funny enough it really kick started almost immediately after Flynn flipped, weird eh?

Dec 10th (referencing Gingrich/Hannity comments from the week previous) - http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mcmanus-mueller-delegitimization-20171210-story.html#

Dec 12th - Trump's lawyers calling for investigation into Mueller: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/12/16766548/sekulow-mueller-trump-special-counsel

Dec 12th - Here are FOX calling for a 'complete cleansing' of the FBI: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/how-fox-is-undermining-the-mueller-investigation.html

Dec 15th - Here's the same congressman again demanding Mueller be fired:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/gop-congressman-demands-mueller-firing-time-put-shut/story?id=51814557

Sure here's the same Republican congressman calling for Mueller's sacking over a month ago - I wonder why he's so eager for this? https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz/status/928340949788430336/video/1
Dec 17th - FOX calling the FBI A 'criminal cabal' and Andrew McCabe (who has mysteriously brought in for repeated, lengthy questioning on extremely short notice and has come under attack from Republicans, almost as if there were some strange coordinated efforts going on!?!? ) being labelled as 'Mueller's consigliere' - https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/12/17/pirro_doubles_down_andrew_mccabe_is_consigliere_of_the_fbi_criminal_cabal.html

c_man

Igotadose wrote: »

Even Trump couldn't be so stupid as to say the things he's been reported as to having said in June, that Haitian immigrants all have AIDS and Nigerians live in huts? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/23/politics/donald-trump-oval-office-immigration/index.html

Wait... this is Trump... there's no meaning to 'too stupid.'

"The explosive and disparaging remarks about immigrants attributed to the president were sourced to a pair of unnamed officials, one who the Times said was present in the meeting, and another who was briefed about the comments by a second attendee."


So one guy said he heard it, and another guy heard it from someone who says they were there (the first guy?). Solid journalism there CNN.




Top Story: "Trump reportedly told his staffers 'Purple Monkey Dishwasher', one guy who wants to remain anon but definitely exists says."

Peregrinus

c_man wrote: »

"The explosive and disparaging remarks about immigrants attributed to the president were sourced to a pair of unnamed officials, one who the Times said was present in the meeting, and another who was briefed about the comments by a second attendee."


So one guy said he heard it, and another guy heard it from someone who says they were there (the first guy?). . . .

No, a second attendee. The Times is saying that they heard it directly from one eye-witness, and indirectly from a second eye-witness.

c_man

Unless they know for sure who the "second attendee" was, and they didn't come forward so the paper can't possibly know that, then it's nonsense to include that as "evidence".

Peregrinus

It's not "evidence"; it's a "source".

We don't know whether they know who the second attendee was. Maybe they do; maybe they don't. Obviously, they have to make a call as to the credibility of the person who says he heard the second attendee say this; their view about his credibility may be influenced by whether he has named the second attendee to them. (And about other factors; is he someone to whom the second attendee is likely to repeat such things? Has be previously been a reliable source? Is he in any way connected with their first source? How closely does he corroborate what they have from their first source, and is this (a) an amazing coincidence, (b) evidence of a conspiracy or (c) suggestive of the fact that both the first source and the second source are accurately relaying something that actually happened.

This is the kind of judgment that journalists and editors have to make all the time. Their reputation as a newspaper depends on the quality of these judgments.

Hande hoche!

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm not sure how that shows what you say it does - the rumour wasn't from Dec 20th when Warner's comments and tweets were from - it's been going on for several weeks prior with the likes of FOX the primary people pushing it (which Warner repeatedly referenced). Funny enough it really kick started almost immediately after Flynn flipped, weird eh?

Dec 10th (referencing Gingrich/Hannity comments from the week previous) - http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mcmanus-mueller-delegitimization-20171210-story.html#

Dec 12th - Trump's lawyers calling for investigation into Mueller: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/12/16766548/sekulow-mueller-trump-special-counsel

Dec 12th - Here are FOX calling for a 'complete cleansing' of the FBI: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/how-fox-is-undermining-the-mueller-investigation.html

Dec 15th - Here's the same congressman again demanding Mueller be fired:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/gop-congressman-demands-mueller-firing-time-put-shut/story?id=51814557

Sure here's the same Republican congressman calling for Mueller's sacking over a month ago - I wonder why he's so eager for this? https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz/status/928340949788430336/video/1
Dec 17th - FOX calling the FBI A 'criminal cabal' and Andrew McCabe (who has mysteriously brought in for repeated, lengthy questioning on extremely short notice and has come under attack from Republicans, almost as if there were some strange coordinated efforts going on!?!? ) being labelled as 'Mueller's consigliere' - https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/12/17/pirro_doubles_down_andrew_mccabe_is_consigliere_of_the_fbi_criminal_cabal.html

Was referring to the specific rumour that Mueller was to be fired on the 22nd of December.

aloyisious

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Seems that the rumour of Trump planning on firing Mueller yesterday was spread by House Democrats.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-firing-russia-investigation-special-counsel-us-constitution-senator-mark-a8121801.html

Still impressed that Jeff Sessions is hanging on.

Don ain't exactly reliable when it comes to doing, getting around to doing, or succeeding in doing things he's said he will do. The notion that he would put a specific date to have something done by should have been a clue to the reality of the story above, the only exception it being his usual personally made fake news.

aloyisious

A seasonal way to express one's opinion on one's government and it's decisions.... Secret Service Agent at door - escuse me M'am, we are investigatig a delivery of s**t to the Treasury Secretary, would you happen to know annything about it?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/world/box-of-horse-manure-sent-to-us-treasury-secretary-820204.html

Thepoet85

I see he's taking credit for leading the charge on the liberation of the phrase Merry Christmas.

Would he ever take a day off.