Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Quin_Dub

The Fox News angle?

Jason Chaffetz is presenting the Laura Ingraham show this evening , which is just weird

He has Mike Huckabee on and the view is "it's nothing to do with Russia and they were both liars with had little to do with Trump"

They are using the murder of Mollie Tibbets by an immigrant as their angle..

They are saying "People won't care about Cohen & Manfort , but they'll care about Mollie!!!"

Patser

The Fox news website actually doesn't have the Cohen thing anywhere near its headlines. Instead it's the Tibetts murder, Manafort, something about a Trump pick not getting selected, something about Harry and Meaghans future kids rules....

But Cohen, it's there if you look, but nowhere near headlines and this is the bigger story today as it directly brings Trump into the firing line.

aloyisious

In another NY court case on Monday, judge finds against Trump, as an employer, regarding assault on Mexican protesters outside trump Towers, incl infringement of their 1st amendment rights. The case dates back to 2015.

The judge based his decision in part on a statement made by Trump at a campaign rally, which he buried in a footnote: “Maybe he should have been roughed up because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing,” Trump said, according to the judge’s Monday decision.

Tapia wrote that “an employer may be held vicariously responsible for a tort committed by his or her employee within the scope of employment.

In an initial victory for the plaintiffs, on Oct. 8, 2015, Tapia granted an injunction for interfering with the demonstration and violating the plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly. “Inhibition of the demonstrators’ fundamental rights is irreparable. Loss of one’s right to free speech is considered an irreparable injury,” wrote Tapia, noting that the assault occurred on a public sidewalk, as opposed to private property.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/08/21/trump-must-face-claims-of-assault-on-mexican-protesters-judge-says/

Rhineshark

Bad day for Trump then.

So his response of course is to ramble to his rally about 25% tariffs on EU cars (despite even the investigation into this prospect coming back with "Do not do this, it will hurt Americans. No, really Mr President we mean it"). So presumably Iran, China (not obeying the US regarding Iranian oil) and Turkey are next.

Stallingrad

Encouraging 24 hours until you realise he does not do apologies, contrition or accountability. The GOP will go to ground. His base do not care. He will try some crazy distraction. All we can hope for is that this death by a thousand cuts will mean something positive in November.

borderlinemeath

Cohen is the type that enjoys the reality tv celebrity aspect of being associated with Trump. Even now with a conviction looming over him, it must be driving him crazy that Trump hasn't even alluded to him since the news broke, but Manafort is still "a good man" even though "It had nothing to do with me" and "no proof of Russian Collusion". In years to come after all the sentencing has been served, there will be a tell all book by Cohen, with even more detail - and plenty of salacious gossip - than we'll find out from the current investigations.



I'm half expecting Melania to do a runner in the coming days. How she can still stay in the same place as Trump (let alone stay married to him) is beyond me.

Akrasia

StringerBell wrote: »

Toobin speculates manafort is looking at 10 years, says in Federal prison you have to serve 85% of your sentence so even with good behaviour without a pardon a 70 year old man is looking at 8.5 years.

Trump on fire distancing himself from manafort while maintaining he's a good man. Disgrace and all the usual.

Manafort still has a minimum of one more trial to go. If Trump wasn't gonna pardon him he may have given a slight hint at that tonight when he said it's sad the way this ends as in Manaforts story.

The longer it goes on the less likely a pardon is imo. The clearer it is that Manafort deserves everything he gets the more heat would be on Trump and he may not fancy it. Can't rule anything out with Trump though regardless

Surely draining the swamp had a victory today? Just cause there's no Russian collusion in manaforts charges seems to mean he should have got away with what the investigation turned up and that's just swallowed incredibly by the base and the rest.

Another rep who endorsed Trump early has been indicted for campaign finance violations along with his wife, his name escapes me. He's from California.

If trump doesn't pardon Manafort, there is zero incentive for any of his other co conspirators to cover for Trump anymore. They'd flip on him immediately the day there are pictures of Manafort being led into federal prison in an orange jumpsuit

Leroy42

Cohens lawyer has said that Cohen will tell Mueller that Trump colluded with Russia and Trump knew of the DNC hack in advance.

If true that is major news. Trump really is in serious trouble here.

Of course Cohen can tell them anything, doesn't make it true, but it is quite a statement for his lawyer to make.

On the other hand, we have Trumps lawyer telling us about perjury traps and that truth isn't truth.

Akrasia

Leroy42 wrote: »

Cohens lawyer has said that Cohen will tell Mueller that Trump colluded with Russia and Trump knew of the DNC hack in advance.

If true that is major news. Trump really is in serious trouble here.

Of course Cohen can tell them anything, doesn't make it true, but it is quite a statement for his lawyer to make.

On the other hand, we have Trumps lawyer telling us about perjury traps and that truth isn't truth.

Presumably there'll be a paper trail or phone records to corroborate these claims

Christy42

Akrasia wrote: »

StringerBell wrote: »

Toobin speculates manafort is looking at 10 years, says in Federal prison you have to serve 85% of your sentence so even with good behaviour without a pardon a 70 year old man is looking at 8.5 years.

Trump on fire distancing himself from manafort while maintaining he's a good man. Disgrace and all the usual.

Manafort still has a minimum of one more trial to go. If Trump wasn't gonna pardon him he may have given a slight hint at that tonight when he said it's sad the way this ends as in Manaforts story.

The longer it goes on the less likely a pardon is imo. The clearer it is that Manafort deserves everything he gets the more heat would be on Trump and he may not fancy it. Can't rule anything out with Trump though regardless

Surely draining the swamp had a victory today? Just cause there's no Russian collusion in manaforts charges seems to mean he should have got away with what the investigation turned up and that's just swallowed incredibly by the base and the rest.

Another rep who endorsed Trump early has been indicted for campaign finance violations along with his wife, his name escapes me. He's from California.

If trump doesn't pardon Manafort, there is zero incentive for any of his other co conspirators to cover for Trump anymore. They'd flip on him immediately the day there are pictures of Manafort being led into federal prison in an orange jumpsuit

Really just family left to go before reaching Trump. They may consider themselves special cases

Everyone else is smaller fry than what they have unless they happened to be in the right room at the right time.

kilns

Come 12pm/1pm today it should be fun, as thats the time Trump usually wakes up and takes to Twitter

Nody

Akrasia wrote: »

If trump doesn't pardon Manafort, there is zero incentive for any of his other co conspirators to cover for Trump anymore. They'd flip on him immediately the day there are pictures of Manafort being led into federal prison in an orange jumpsuit

The problem is if he does pardon Manafort he opens himself up because Manafort can then no longer plead the 5th (self incrimination) on the topic meaning he can be forced to testify (or face jail for contempt of court) about why, how, whom etc. Manafort admitting he got money from Russia to influence the election; even if not directly naming Trump will still cause issues for Trump's "I trust Putin because he told me so" strategy.

Gbear

What is the precedent for having committed a felony and getting away without impeachment as a president, and what is the precedent for the impeachment failing to remove him in the other cases?

Of course, there's Clinton, but even that was a bit of a technical crime to do with an ultimately trivial set of events. He probably still should've gone, but have we ever seen anything like Trump's case? Have we seen such pessimism for the likelihood of the partisan houses of government actually doing their jobs before, or is this Republican party particularly useless and negligent?

borderlinemeath

Gbear wrote: »

What is the precedent for having committed a felony and getting away without impeachment as a president, and what is the precedent for the impeachment failing to remove him in the other cases?

Of course, there's Clinton, but even that was a bit of a technical crime to do with an ultimately trivial set of events. He probably still should've gone, but have we ever seen anything like Trump's case? Have we seen such pessimism for the likelihood of the partisan houses of government actually doing their jobs before, or is this Republican party particularly useless and negligent?

A large number of Republicans are covering their own backsides. Campaign contributions from shady sources ultimately lead back to Russia. If they move to impeach Trump they run the risk of outing themselves too. And none of them have the backbone to do what is right.

everlast75

borderlinemeath wrote: »

[/B]

A large number of Republicans are covering their own backsides. Campaign contributions from shady sources ultimately lead back to Russia. If they move to impeach Trump they run the risk of outing themselves too. And none of them have the backbone to do what is right.

As pointed out earlier, Santorum was saying this was a major problem for Trump.

(He also squeezed in a murder by an illegal immigrant into the story, saying Trump's base cares more about that. Sadly, that's true, which rather than being a point made in defence of Trump, should be acknowledged as a horrific indication of the complete and utter lack of morals of a supposed Christian base)

B0jangles

B0jangles wrote: »

If the Clintons are so obviously criminal, why are the Republicans incapable of producing a single sustainable charge against them?

Heaven knows, they've talked about it long enough, Trump made it a platform of his campaign to 'Lock Her Up', if I remember correctly.

It seems to me the options are:

1. Republicans are too incompetent to do so (which bodes ill for MAGA).
2. Republicans are profoundly corrupt and have been paid off by the Clintons (again, not so great for MAGA).

3. Maaaaybe the Clintons aren't actually supervillains and for all the investigations and rumour, there isn't actually a sustainable case against them? (crazy I know!)

You have to accept that if criminal claims are true about the Clintons, then the Republicans are either profoundly incompetent or profoundly compromised.

Incompetent or Corrupt, which is it?

Nody

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The link to the trump campaign really hasn't been proven anywhere

Cohen admitting he made illegal campaign contributions to the Trump campaign on direct order of Trump is not a link to the Trump campaign? Please tell me how you twisted that one around.

Also didn't Omarosa have a video of Cohen boarding the Trump plane during the campaign?

Eric Cartman

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Also didn't Omarosa have a video of Cohen boarding the Trump plane during the campaign?

In her big bag of things that don't exist

Eric Cartman

Nody wrote: »

Cohen admitting he made illegal campaign contributions to the Trump campaign on direct order of Trump is not a link to the Trump campaign? Please tell me how you twisted that one around.

Where does he admit this himself (not his lawyer for a soundbite)

batgoat

Eric Cartman wrote: »

In her big bag of things that don't exist

While I think the video she released is minimal, she did release it. So it does exist... Anyway, things have started to implode for Trump this week Eric, this is the reality.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

In her big bag of things that don't exist

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/402941-omarosa-shares-video-of-cohen-from-2016

everlast75

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Where does he admit this himself (not his lawyer for a soundbite)

"He told the judge that he was aware of what he was doing before pleading guilty to the charges, admitting that he worked "at the direction of candidate" when he attempted to buy the silence of Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate who has claimed she had an affair with Mr Trump in 2016.



Ex-Trump lawyer investigated for over $20 million of alleged fraud
Mr Cohen also admitted that he worked "with and at the direction of the same candidate" to deliver a $130,000 (£100,000) payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to silence her claims about an affair.

Although did not mention Mr Trump's name he was employed by the billionaire businessman, then a presidential candidate, at the time the payments were made."

Nody

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Where does he admit this himself (not his lawyer for a soundbite)

In his court filings in his plea deal where he and I quote:

in coordination and at the direction of a candidate for federal office he acted to keep information that would have been harmful to the candidate and the campaign from becoming public during the 2016 election cycle.

And since as already shown in court he only had 3 clients (all named) and only one of them being a "candidate for federal office" it is a tad hard to get said candidate to be someone else.

Eric Cartman

B0jangles wrote: »

It's like saying the rosary for Trumpers - 'say 10 Lock Her Ups and 5 Drain the Swamps and the bad news will just float away' - it's a comforting ritual to block out uncomfortable reality.

edit: Come on Eric - Incompetent or Corrupt?

Corrupt, most us politiciansboth sides of the aisle are corrupt

batgoat

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Corrupt, most us politiciansboth sides of the aisle are corrupt

His lawyer says that they have proof that he knew of Russia hacking in advance. That's a pretty huge crime. Bigger than campaign financing.

B0jangles

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Corrupt, most us politiciansboth sides of the aisle are corrupt

So if they are so incredibly corrupt, how are they going to MAGA?


Why do you believe they even want to?

Eric Cartman

[Deleted User] wrote: »

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/402941-omarosa-shares-video-of-cohen-from-2016

Wheres the actual video in that though (if its there and i missed it then i do apologise) , theres a link to a video where msnbc people talk about the video, but if theres a 'video released' just like the last Omarosa tape, show me the raw copy or its still nothing

Penn

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The link to the trump campaign really hasn't been proven anywhere

It was a part of the Special Counsel's brief and remit that they could charge individuals with any crimes which were uncovered during the investigation into Russian Collusion even if those crimes did not relate to Russian Collusion. So while investigation Manafort, Gates etc, crimes of bank fraud etc were discovered. That means they can be charged with those crimes (because ultimately, illegality is illegality, and if law enforcement become aware of a crime, they can act on it).

Plus, Cohen's lawyer on MSNBC last night indicated that Cohen was willing to testify or had information that Trump knew in advance of the Russia meeting at Trump Tower and knew about Russian hacking in advance. This wouldn't have come up yesterday because Cohen's court appearance yesterday was about his own crimes, not Trump's.

Your image says "Prosecute Mueller". For what? Doing his job? His job is to investigate potential crimes, regardless of whether those crimes happened or not. That's what the investigation is for. If he found no evidence of crimes, he still wouldn't be able to be prosecuted for that because all it would mean is he undertook an investigation and found no evidence of any crimes.

We don't know if he's found any solid evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign yet, or at least enough to likely end up with a conviction. But in the course of that investigation he has found evidence of numerous crimes by individuals connected to the Trump campaign, resulting in guilty pleas and convictions from senior members of the Trump campaign, and he is well within his remit as a law official to prosecute those individuals in accordance with the law and his position.

If a detective is investigating someone for murder and discovers they were robbing a bank at that time and couldn't have committed the murder, they don't shrug their shoulders and walk away. They arrest the guy for robbing the bank.

Eric Cartman

B0jangles wrote: »

So if they are so incredibly corrupt, how are they going to MAGA?


Why do you believe they even want to?

Better than letting it get worse under a democrat, best of a bad bunch really.