Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Leroy42

An Toirpin, be interested to see what your definition of collusion is.

Cambridge Dicctionary has the following:

agreement between people to act together secretly or illegally in order to deceive or cheat someone:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/collusion

Since Trump has lied throughout about his business ties with Russia it is clear that it meets the secretly part. Deceive is clearly met since he deceived the entire electorate in terms of his dealings with Russia.

dr.fuzzenstein

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/12/18136826/senate-yemen-war-resolution-saudi-arabia-khashoggi

The Senate is moving toward passing a resolution this week to end US involvement in the war in Yemen — in what could be a stunning show of bipartisan pushback against the Trump administration and its support for Saudi Arabia.

When the Senate is the last bit of support that Trump has and it pushes back against him, he should be worried.
It may be largely symbolic, but it is a kick against the shin nevertheless.

Zubeneschamali

26000 Elephants wrote: »

Lets not jump to hasty conclusions on Cohen: the President's lawyer being sentenced to jail today sheds no more light on the President than the convictions of the President's campaign manager, the President's deputy campaign manager, the President's national security adviser, or the President's campaign adviser.

And Cohen was not just Trump's personal lawyer; from April 2017 to June 2018 he was deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee. It goes wider than just Trump.

Igotadose

Melania Trump whines to Shammity about getting a hard time from 'opportunists.' https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/12/politics/melania-trump-opportunists/index.html

Melania Trump talking about other opportunists brings a laugh. First of all, she's the ultimate opportunist, look who she married. Second, considering the invective and racism hurled at Michelle Obama, you never heard her whine. Just a better person, Michelle, full of strong character unlike Melania.

PropJoe10

Igotadose wrote: »

Melania Trump whines to Shammity about getting a hard time from 'opportunists.' https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/12/politics/melania-trump-opportunists/index.html

Melania Trump talking about other opportunists brings a laugh. First of all, she's the ultimate opportunist, look who she married. Second, considering the invective and racism hurled at Michelle Obama, you never heard her whine. Just a better person, Michelle, full of strong character unlike Melania.

I think Melania lost any credibility when she made cyber-bullying her area to focus on as First Lady. Considering who her husband is, she might've picked a different topic to focus on.

everlast75

Just thinking about where we are now.

Think of the stories that broke 6 months ago. They were sensational at the time, but they were just news stories. They came and went. There was always something to talk about the next day or week.

But now, those scandals have ramifications - they are being proven in a court of law today. People are going to jail.

Now - think of all the stuff that has happened since. What if all of those scandals will be proven one day in Court, and soon.

I keep coming back to this. The only way out for Trump is to do a deal with SDNY..... co-opperate now and save himself (as he is looking at real jail time) and his family, along with all the other disgrace that will come to the fore in the meantime.

Heaven knows he hated the job when he had both houses. Now he's to deal with NP? Nothing will be done, Mueller is nearly done with the slam dunk that is the collusion aspect, and that's even before the easier Obstruction Report, people he knows have gone to jail, and other people he knew are co-operating. He'll hate being president even more now.

Some have said that the Dems will drag this out as close to the 2020 elections as they can. Wait for Mueller all the while issuing subpoenas for the ones who lied and the ones that the Reps wouldn't call.

I agree that's a smart play by Dems, but that is also another reason for him to want to go. Imagine having to put up with that!

We had Cohen going yesterday.

Butina today.

Flynn sentencing soon (albeit no jail, but it will still make news).

Manafort sentencing in January.

It is not going to end.

He needs to quit now or it will be death by a thousand paper cuts.

phater phagan

PropJoe10 wrote: »

I think Melania lost any credibility when she made cyber-bullying her area to focus on as First Lady. Considering who her husband is, she might've picked a different topic to focus on.

Also her " I don't really care. Do you?" jacket whilst on the way to,supposedly, give support the separated immigrant children from their parents showed an astonishing lack of compassion and a great deal of moral turpitude.
I take no comfort tho' in Trump's demise, but feel that he brought in on himself - it's sad for the USA that such a person is president.

DrumSteve

rossie1977 wrote: »

Investigation is moving exceptionally quickly

Just remembering that whole Valerie Plame affair after looking at that... she was screwed over pretty badly.

Leroy42

He can't quit now. He is stuck in a corner. 1st to quit would be the same as admitting defeat, and Trump doesn't do that.

Second, whatever about himself, quitting now puts the Trump name, and empire, in serious jeopardy.

People continue to have, IMO, the wrong opinion of what Trump is trying to achieve. Whether or not he actually colluded directly with Russia, this whole thing, from the starting of the campaign to his actual presidency, have all been about leveraging the position of POTUS in terms of business.

That is why he is so soft on Putin. Not because he thinks Russia or Putin are badly treated or misunderstood, but because there is potential business there. Same with SA. Why would he upset them when he will require them on board to help him get planning permission etc when he leaves office.

POTUS is not some overarching calling to him. It is not some desire to MAGA, or drain the swamp. The make the world a better place blah blah. It is a business opportunity. The increase in revenue in his hotels in Washington from foreign diplomats. The granting of trade for Ivanka. Even getting hotels in NK.

What is the advantage of giving up the position now? There is none. He can potentially hold off all this as POTUS. He has worked hard to discredit Mueller and the other investigations. He has been pretty successful in that his personal lawyer was just sentencing to 3 years in jail for illegal work he undertook on behalf of Trump and there has been almost no outcry.

It is a risky move, but the alternative, to simply walk away, is so uncomfortable that it isn't an option. As others have said, he probably regrets the whole thing now, but it is too late. He needs the protection of the office and the GOP or he faces really serious problems.

jooksavage

everlast75 wrote: »

He needs to quit now or it will be death by a thousand paper cuts.

As Seth Abrahamson said yesterday, Cohen's sentence highlights that but for the fact that he's president, Trump would also be frog-marched off to jail. He literally has no choice but to stay in office now - it's his only chance of protecting himself and his family from federal charges. There should be no expectation that Pence would grant him a pardon. Once he's gone, Trump and his offspring will be zero use to the Republicans. They're unlikely to squander their already dwindling capital trying to keep Don Jr. and Kushner out of jail, whatever about Trump Sr.

Trump's reelection campaign will be a fight for his life.

Penn

everlast75 wrote: »

I keep coming back to this. The only way out for Trump is to do a deal with SDNY..... co-opperate now and save himself (as he is looking at real jail time) and his family, along with all the other disgrace that will come to the fore in the meantime.

Would they ever jail him though? Even if found guilty, the fact that he's now President Trump for the rest of his life (eg. still President Trump once he's leave office even though he's no longer President) and considering all that goes with that for security reasons etc, I just can't see them ever sending him to any kind of real jail. Possibly house arrest in some large country estate where he can't leave the grounds and there are numerous restrictions etc, but not jail and he still would be living quite comfortably.

I just don't see it happening, certainly not for much of the campaign finance violations where he's quite clearly an unindicted co-conspirator. Maybe depending on how deep the Russia stuff might go.

StringerBell

An_Toirpin wrote: »

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/donna-brazile-finally-admits-she-shared-debate-questions-with-clinton-campaign

President Clinton should be impeached immediately

Leroy42

StringerBell wrote: »

President Clinton should be impeached immediately

Impeached for what exactly?

Getting passed notes is now an impeachable offence?

When you say impeached, you mean by the senate? But she doesn't hold any office so not sure why they would be involved?

Penn

Leroy42 wrote: »

Impeached for what exactly?

Getting passed notes is now an impeachable offence?

When you say impeached, you mean by the senate? But she doesn't hold any office so not sure why they would be involved?

I think he's mocking the idea that if Clinton had been elected President and that story came out, Republicans would be calling for her to be impeached, yet in reality they're fine with everything Trump has done.

volchitsa

jooksavage wrote: »

As Seth Abrahamson said yesterday, Cohen's sentence highlights that but for the fact that he's president, Trump would also be frog-marched off to jail. He literally has no choice but to stay in office now - it's his only chance of protecting himself and his family from federal charges. There should be no expectation that Pence would grant him a pardon. Once he's gone, Trump and his offspring will be zero use to the Republicans. They're unlikely to squander their already dwindling capital trying to keep Don Jr. and Kushner out of jail, whatever about Trump Sr.

Trump's reelection campaign will be a fight for his life.

This is the most amazing thing about it, IMO: it's been made clear that if he weren't president, he'd be being charged with crimes now and yet the Repubs are still supporting him.

I suspect that having a Republican ex president going in the history books for doing time would terrify them even more and that they may well squander, as you call it, their capital in the shorter term to prevent that indelible stain.

Basically I think they are in too deep to drop him now, and that Trump is counting on that too.

StringerBell

Leroy42 wrote: »

Impeached for what exactly?

Getting passed notes is now an impeachable offence?

When you say impeached, you mean by the senate? But she doesn't hold any office so not sure why they would be involved?

Perhaps I was unclear

President Hilary Clinton, who defeated Donald Trump in the 2016 election and is currently the sitting President of The United States should be immediately impeached for deceiving the public, cheating to gain advantage in a campaign and lying about it. Covering it up.

It is a horrendous act of moral failure and a person capable of such should not be fit for the highest office in the land.

Hilary Clinton must be removed from office immediately, if you don't hold the people in the highest levels of government to the highest moral and ethical standard what kind of tone does that set and message does it send to the rest of the country?

Leroy42

^ sorry, I totally missed that!

phater phagan

Penn wrote: »

I think he's mocking the idea that if Clinton had been elected President and that story came out, Republicans would be calling for her to be impeached, yet in reality they're fine with everything Trump has done.

Yes, and that's been the strategy of the Republicans all along. President Obama told in well when he was campaigning for the Dems recently. He called it the " look over there" tactic. Whenever question on a damaging subject was asked to them they would always respond with "What about...." and not answer it. It's a distracting strategy that worked for Trump and his cronies well in the past, but which is now wearing thin, and they can only say "Fake News" so many times until it becomes apparent that the real fakes are they themselves.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

He can't quit now. He is stuck in a corner. 1st to quit would be the same as admitting defeat, and Trump doesn't do that.

That's a fallacy. He does quit. He has settled numerous cases brought against him. He has folded businesses. He has declared bankrupt.

The idea that he doesn't quit is what he wants to portray. In reality, he is both weak and a coward, and its all coming home to roost.

Leroy42 wrote: »

Second, whatever about himself, quitting now puts the Trump name, and empire, in serious jeopardy.

Staying could be worse. Whatever deal he might strike now will be well gone if this is dragged out. What the SNDY and Mueller have shown consistently is that if you co-operate, they will be lenient.

Leroy42 wrote: »

People continue to have, IMO, the wrong opinion of what Trump is trying to achieve. Whether or not he actually colluded directly with Russia, this whole thing, from the starting of the campaign to his actual presidency, have all been about leveraging the position of POTUS in terms of business.

I agree - they are grifters.

But as I said, ALL of it will come out in the wash. if there was a chance that it wouldn't, then I would imagine that would be the path he would take - press on and hope for the best. But there is zero chance of that happening.

Leroy42 wrote: »

What is the advantage of giving up the position now? There is none. He can potentially hold off all this as POTUS. He has worked hard to discredit Mueller and the other investigations. He has been pretty successful in that his personal lawyer was just sentencing to 3 years in jail for illegal work he undertook on behalf of Trump and there has been almost no outcry.

Again - that's news. That is all.

What is coming is Court.

What is coming is attending to give evidence.

What is coming is handcuffs. There is no way this works out any other way unless he makes a deal.

Self preservation will kick in - its just a matter of when.

Leroy42 wrote: »

It is a risky move, but the alternative, to simply walk away, is so uncomfortable that it isn't an option. As others have said, he probably regrets the whole thing now, but it is too late. He needs the protection of the office and the GOP or he faces really serious problems.

The GOP will jettison him before 2020. People who want to run will start to first sit there and do nothing as he gets into further trouble (see Pence), then others will start to vote against him (see Graham, Flake, Collins) and then those with ambitions of 2020 will start their outward war on him.

The animal is wounded, and the others sense it.

Stallingrad

Given a choice between Trump for the next two years, or Pence taking over if it came to that, I wonder what people would choose?

The Plan B is pretty grim and maybe the Buffoon we know is better than the Devil we don't.

jooksavage

Stallingrad wrote: »

Given a choice between Trump for the next two years, or Pence taking over if it came to that, I wonder what people would choose?

The Plan B is pretty grim and maybe the Buffoon we know is better than the Devil we don't.

I'm not sure why everyone is so afraid of Pence. He's awful, obviously but he's also a big dull dud. He doesn't have the charisma (or what passes for charisma among idiots) that keeps The Base buoying up Trump or the brainless self-assurance that would allow him to lie barefaced day-in, day-out like the President. Sure, if he got in, he'd make a better fist of the pushing the Republican agenda but he'd also be vulnerable in ways that Trump is seemingly invulnerable: he can be embarrassed, and he's subject to the laws of political gravity that can end it for any uninspiring, insipid milk-toast politician.

Professor Moriarty

Stallingrad wrote: »

Given a choice between Trump for the next two years, or Pence taking over if it came to that, I wonder what people would choose?

The Plan B is pretty grim and maybe the Buffoon we know is better than the Devil we don't.

Can't see it. Trump is an appalling person and POTUS. Anyone would be better than Trump.

aloyisious

Maybe it's time for the U.S citizens to have a close look at the ability of their president to grant pardons to their predecessors in office. I see pardons as being a way to delete or lessen the jail-time, or the effect of same, on a person given the wrong sentence in respect of the crime convicted and not in the way they've sometimes been used by presidents as a part of presidential and party national politics. Call a change as being necessary for the greater good of the U.S, instead of an imagined greater good of presidential freedom of action not being restricted.

The way U.S presidents have been pardoned for criminal behaviour in office by their immediate heir in the office reduces the value of a presidential pardon, making it a handy tool in case he/she needs one for a crime committed without said crime being committed in absolute need of the U.S itself. Call it making the president accountable for misuse of the pardon when it is used to prevent a former president being held accountable to criminal law for a crime he committed for personal gain, and not one done for the sole and absolute benefit of the U.S.

If the crime committed is directly beneficial to one's electoral success or benefit, do the crime. do the time. Don seem's happy enough for that rule to apply to Citizen Cohen.

Tell me how

aloyisious wrote: »

Maybe it's time for the U.S citizens to have a close look at the ability of their president to grant pardons to their predecessors in office. I see pardons as being a way to delete or lessen the jail-time, or the effect of same, on a person given the wrong sentence in respect of the crime convicted and not in the way they've sometimes been used by presidents as a part of presidential and party national politics. Call a change as being necessary for the greater good of the U.S, instead of an imagined greater good of presidential freedom of action not being restricted.

The way U.S presidents have been pardoned for criminal behaviour in office by their immediate heir in the office reduces the value of a presidential pardon, making it a handy tool in case he/she needs one for a crime committed without said crime being committed in absolute need of the U.S itself. Call it making the president accountable for misuse of the pardon when it is used to prevent a former president being held accountable to criminal law for a crime he committed for personal gain, and not one done for the sole and absolute benefit of the U.S.

If the crime committed is directly beneficial to one's electoral success or benefit, do the crime. do the time. Don seem's happy enough for that rule to apply to Citizen Cohen.

The only reason we are not talking about Cohen and a pardon is because of the work which Mueller had done in ensuring that Trumps hands are tied, that if Trump was to pardon Cohen it would unquestionably indicate that Trump was thanking Cohen for protecting him. Mueller had Cohen bang to rights in this instance. There was no room for Trump to pretend there was ambiguity around a conviction and so a pardon was reasonable.

Also, the relationshipbetween Cohen and Trump seemed to have had broken down as evidenced by Cohen remarking in court this week that it was his weakness that had led him to covering up crimes that he should not have done, i.e. Trump was at fault.

Finally, if America is going to do anything for the greater good of the country, there are 1000 things they could look at first rather than the use of presidential pardons.

Gbear

Tell me how wrote: »

Finally, if America is going to do anything for the greater good of the country, there are 1000 things they could look at first rather than the use of presidential pardons.

The entirety of Trump's defence is based on wielding the pardon like a bludgeon. All of his inner circle would have long since been singing like canaries if he didn't have the capacity to bail them out.

This investigation would've been a doddle if Trump wasn't capable of rendering anyone under his patronage above the law.

The so called checks and balances of independent bodies of government don't function if you can just unilaterally ignore them.

Thinking about it, he might well have refused to run or refused to accept the nomination if he didn't have a get out of the jail free card like the pardon.
Not being above the law is a very strong incentive for criminals like Trump to not step into such a role.

everlast75

aloyisious wrote: »

Maybe it's time for the U.S citizens to have a close look at the ability of their president to grant pardons to their predecessors in office. I see pardons as being a way to delete or lessen the jail-time, or the effect of same, on a person given the wrong sentence in respect of the crime convicted and not in the way they've sometimes been used by presidents as a part of presidential and party national politics. Call a change as being necessary for the greater good of the U.S, instead of an imagined greater good of presidential freedom of action not being restricted.

The way U.S presidents have been pardoned for criminal behaviour in office by their immediate heir in the office reduces the value of a presidential pardon, making it a handy tool in case he/she needs one for a crime committed without said crime being committed in absolute need of the U.S itself. Call it making the president accountable for misuse of the pardon when it is used to prevent a former president being held accountable to criminal law for a crime he committed for personal gain, and not one done for the sole and absolute benefit of the U.S.

If the crime committed is directly beneficial to one's electoral success or benefit, do the crime. do the time. Don seem's happy enough for that rule to apply to Citizen Cohen.

The way pardons generally worked (Pre-Trump) was that a panel assessed applications for pardons in cases of serious unjust rulings. A recommendation would be made and the President would deal with it.

There have been some politicised decisions on both sides, but generally it was not abused.

When Trump came along, all of the guidelines were checked to see if they had to be complied with, and where not, he just drove over them.

There are steps being taken to make recommendations that will become law which the next president will have to fulfil, to include tax returns.

I understand the pardon process will be looked at too.

Tell me how

Gbear wrote: »

The entirety of Trump's defence is based on wielding the pardon like a bludgeon. All of his inner circle would have long since been singing like canaries if he didn't have the capacity to bail them out.

This investigation would've been a doddle if Trump wasn't capable of rendering anyone under his patronage above the law.

The so called checks and balances of independent bodies of government don't function if you can just unilaterally ignore them.

Thinking about it, he might well have refused to run or refused to accept the nomination if he didn't have a get out of the jail free card like the pardon.
Not being above the law is a very strong incentive for criminals like Trump to not step into such a role.

It is not much more useful than trying to use a Monopoly get of jail free card in real life. Yes, it would pardon someone but would bring down a world of judgement on his head.

Of the 8 pardons he has issued so far (which is high), none are directly related to his election.

There was talk that Cohen had been tried at a state level in New York purely to avoid Trump being able to grant a federal pardon.

jooksavage

The abuse of pardon power is just another symptom of the problem. If the population was actually represented proportionately (2 senators for Wyoming's 550 thousand and 2 senators for California's 40 million) and the system wasn't slanted against large swathes of the population (hi North Carolina, Georgia, Florida...) there would be political consequences for political wrong-doing. There's some root and branch treatment required here.

Tell me how

jooksavage wrote: »

The abuse of pardon power is just another symptom of the problem. If the population was actually represented proportionately (2 senators for Wyoming's 550 thousand and 2 senators for California's 40 million) and the system wasn't slanted against large swathes of the population (hi North Carolina, Georgia, Florida...) there would be political consequences for political wrong-doing. There's some root and branch treatment required here.

I'm not suggesting it's perfect or that it isn't open to misuse, but, I think it is a long way down the list of things which should be fixed in the US governmental system.

As an aside, and as an indicator of the validity (or lack of) of Wikipedia.
Amongst those listed as having received pardons from George W Bush are one Bill and Hillary Clinton.

George W. Bush

José Compeán and Ignacio Ramos – Two US Border Patrol agents who wounded drug smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete Dávila on February 17, 2005 and tried to cover up the incident received commutation in 2009.
John Forté – Hip-hop singer and songwriter sentenced for smuggling cocaine in 2000 was commuted.
Lewis "Scooter" Libby – Assistant to President George W. Bush and Chief of Staff to Dick Cheney was convicted of perjury in connection with the CIA leak scandal involving members of State Department who 'outed' CIA agent Valerie Plame. Was sentenced to 30 months in prison and fined him $250,000 on June 5, 2007. Libby received commutation of his prison sentence, not a full pardon, on July 2, 2007 . Libby later received a full pardon from President Donald Trump in 2018.
Issac Robert Toussie – Convicted of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in 2001; pardoned in 2008 and the pardon revoked one day later.
Charles Winters – Posthumous pardon for smuggling three B-17 Flying Fortress heavy bombers to Israel in the late 1940s.
Bill Clinton - Former President of the United States; unconditionally pardoned.
Hillary Clinton - Wife of former President Bill Clinton, and 2016 Democrat nominee for US Presidency; unconditionally pardoned.

aloyisious

Tell me how wrote: »

The only reason we are not talking about Cohen and a pardon is because of the work which Mueller had done in ensuring that Trumps hands are tied, that if Trump was to pardon Cohen it would unquestionably indicate that Trump was thanking Cohen for protecting him. Mueller had Cohen bang to rights in this instance. There was no room for Trump to pretend there was ambiguity around a conviction and so a pardon was reasonable.

Also, the relationshipbetween Cohen and Trump seemed to have had broken down as evidenced by Cohen remarking in court this week that it was his weakness that had led him to covering up crimes that he should not have done, i.e. Trump was at fault.

Finally, if America is going to do anything for the greater good of the country, there are 1000 things they could look at first rather than the use of presidential pardons.

I'd be thinking about Don and Mike, or Don's Dem successor, should that happen. No kindness or clemency offers or requests should be allowable from one to the other in respect to the whitewashing of criminal acts done while in office. Let the fall from grace by way of impeachment have the effect that impeachment intended and not blocked by misuse of the presidential pardon power. If there is no evidence of crime or malfeasance likely to appear before the senate, then there is no need for prior use of the pardon.

I'll leave it like that now, my annoyance with pussyfooting around Don and pardon-issuing done for the day.