Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House The Trump Presidency

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Trump Presidency
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(3)
Message 2602 of 4573 (842869)
11-09-2018 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 2601 by Diomedes
11-09-2018 10:39 AM


On a positive note
quote:
The US just elected 9 new scientists to Congress, including an ocean expert, a nurse, and a biochemist
2018 Midterms: New Scientists Elected to US House, Senate
Now that is something I can smile about. And perhaps another idea for Democrats to consider. Being progressive isn't just about ethnic, racial or gender diversity. It's about electing non-lawyers to office. You know, the type of people whose job it is to actually analyze the data and come up with a solution? As opposed to just talking about it endlessly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2601 by Diomedes, posted 11-09-2018 10:39 AM Diomedes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 2791 of 4573 (849909)
03-25-2019 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 2790 by 1.61803
03-25-2019 12:54 PM


Re: The Barr Letter on the Mueller Report
No collusion yet everybody lied when it came to talking to the Russians.
The obstruction question is still on the table even though the DOJ says he is exonerated. Congress is going to not let this go until every possible shred is looked at. Im glad Trump was cleared from collusion. I am not so sure he was not being obstructionist. So is this the end of the beginning or the beginning of the end.?
The issue is far from over. Congress will subpoena the full Mueller report and will scrutinize it with a fine tooth comb. Which is what everyone expects at this stage. People will be called in to testify and there will likely be numerous Congressional hearings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2790 by 1.61803, posted 03-25-2019 12:54 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2792 by Phat, posted 03-26-2019 4:45 AM Diomedes has not replied
 Message 2796 by Faith, posted 03-26-2019 1:16 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 2833 of 4573 (851107)
04-19-2019 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 2832 by Taq
04-19-2019 2:52 PM


Re: Sarah Sanders Lied about the Comey Firing
It was just a 'slip of the tongue' according to Sarah:
quote:
It was just a slip of the tongue.
That’s the explanation that White House press secretary Sarah Sanders is doubling down on after the redacted version of the Mueller report released Thursday revealed that her statements to the press following the firing of FBI Director James Comey were not founded on anything. And critics including April Ryan want her axed over it, with #FireSarahSanders trending on Twitter on Friday morning.
Sarah Sanders doubles down on her ‘slip of the tongue’ excuse as April Ryan calls for her firing - MarketWatch
In an ironic twist, ' Slip of the Tongue' is also one of Stormy Daniels' adult movies.
Ok, I made that part up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2832 by Taq, posted 04-19-2019 2:52 PM Taq has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 2839 of 4573 (851134)
04-20-2019 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 2838 by Percy
04-20-2019 7:16 AM


Re: Mueller Report Lays Groundwork for Impeachment and Post-Presidency Prosecutions
This is pretty straightforward. It says that Congress has responsibility for protecting the country from the corrupt use of presidential power, an indirect reference to impeachment.
Impeachment now makes no sense because conviction in the Senate isn't even a remote possibility. High-profilers advocating impeachment are Elizabeth Warren and AOC. It isn't clear to me why they believe impeachment without conviction would be a better path to the truth than the investigations already initiated in the House.
There are two facets to this: one is criminal and the other is political. And unfortunately, with the way the system works, both have to be weighed.
On the one hand, if ample evidence exists that there was some level of impropriety, bordering on criminal behavior, by the President or the White House, that appears to warrant some level of action by the House. Either further investigations into the actions or impeachment proceedings. As you alluded to, Mueller essentially left that part open for Congress to determine.
Now comes the political component. Would continued investigations or an impeachment proceeding benefit the Democrats in upcoming elections in 2020? That is hard to quantify. But if I play Devil's Advocate for a moment: the primary focus in the Mueller investigation was the prospect of collusion with a foreign power. I.e. Russia. That seems to have been thoroughly debunked. If the Democrats now utilize Congress to continue investigations or push for an impeachment, they may end up playing into Trump's hands and reinforcing the narrative that its all a 'witch hunt'.
If I look at the Clinton impeachment in the 90s, that massively backfired for the Republicans. So there is a danger that a similar situation could manifest here and excessive fixation on the Mueller report could turn into a rallying cry for Trump and his base.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2838 by Percy, posted 04-20-2019 7:16 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2840 by Percy, posted 04-21-2019 11:11 AM Diomedes has replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 2841 of 4573 (851381)
04-23-2019 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 2840 by Percy
04-21-2019 11:11 AM


Re: Mueller Report Lays Groundwork for Impeachment and Post-Presidency Prosecutions
I don't myself see "thoroughly debunked" and "did not establish" as close in meaning, especially when the latter appears after a statement about the "numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign."
Poor choice of words on my part. However, 'did not establish' is essentially stating that the evidence acquired did not seem to indicate willing collusion between Trump and Russia. Ultimately, the Mueller investigation is a fact finding mission. So he is presenting the facts as they were discovered. But based on the collusion portion, what Mueller is essentially stating is that the burden of proof is not met.
Now the obstruction of justice portion is a whole other matter. In that case, Mueller indicated there were SEVERAL instances of attempted obstruction of justice by Trump. And he also iterated that the only reason actual obstruction did not occur is that the checks and balances built into the system prevented Trump from acting on it.
However, attempted obstruction of justice is still something within the legal framework that is actionable. Incidentally, an attorney reviewed the Mueller report and put together a heat map of the instances as outlined.
Reference: Obstruction of Justice in the Mueller Report: A Heat Map - Lawfare
Impeachment seems a futile exercise given Republican control of the Senate and the requirement of a 2/3 majority for conviction, but about incidents like the Trump Tower meeting and the sharing of polling data the Mueller report gives legalistic arguments for not delivering indictments having to do with the difficulty of establishing intent and the value of certain information. And then there are all the obstruction incidents.
The Democrats might get a modestly improved benefit from impeachment if at the outset they clearly outline goals stating that they understand conviction isn't a realistic possibility but that they want to heed their constitutional responsibilities and also establish what really happened to the extent possible. But it would still be, as has been said, a political rather than judicial exercise.
I am still waffling on this. But based on the numbers, I don't see impeachment as leading to anything other than just political wrangling at this stage. The Dems could potentially just start hearings and maybe even subpoena other individuals like Don Jr. or Jared Kushner. See if anything sticks there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2840 by Percy, posted 04-21-2019 11:11 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2842 by Percy, posted 04-23-2019 9:57 AM Diomedes has replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 2843 of 4573 (851383)
04-23-2019 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 2842 by Percy
04-23-2019 9:57 AM


Re: Mueller Report Lays Groundwork for Impeachment and Post-Presidency Prosecutions
Diomedes writes:
But based on the collusion portion, what Mueller is essentially stating is that the burden of proof is not met.
That's what Mueller thinks, but Schiff thinks the burden of proof *is* met. Who's right? Schiff's position makes far more sense to me than Mueller's, so I'll be closely following the committee's investigation.
Schiff is a Democratic Congressman. I am not picking sides and have no love for Trump, but I hardly think Schiff is approaching this in an unbiased fashion. If the Dems start undermining Mueller's interpretations of the events or understanding of the law, then the entire situation is going to devolve into a 'he said, she said' between attorneys across party lines. Don't think that will help things and will just reinforce the Trump 'witch hunt' narrative.
By "hearings" I think you mean impeachment hearings? If so, I don't think impeachment hearings are necessary. I think the investigations the House committees already have planned are sufficient. I assume they'll subpoena people like Trump Jr. and Kushner and so on. The outcomes of the investigation will help inform any decisions on impeachment.
Sorry, didn't mean impeachment hearings. The existing investigations that are planned are the right way to go at this stage. Further hearings may become possible pending the outcome of the existing investigations.
My concern is still the political fallout. Which is why I am wearing two hats here. One is looking at the evidence resulting from the Mueller investigation and determining the legal ramifications. And the other is trying to gauge the political ramifications and fallout from investigative or potential impeachment proceedings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2842 by Percy, posted 04-23-2019 9:57 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2844 by Percy, posted 04-23-2019 11:02 AM Diomedes has not replied
 Message 2845 by Taq, posted 04-23-2019 3:18 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 4274 of 4573 (881246)
08-20-2020 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 4273 by Hyroglyphx
08-20-2020 2:14 PM


Re: Bannon arrested for fraud
I guess Trump has never heard of airplanes... or ladders.... or shovels... or explosives. Fly over it, climb over it, blow a hole through it, or tunnel underneath it.
You can go one further: a large portion of the border between Mexico and Texas is the Rio Grande river. Was he planning on building a wall in the center of it? Or maybe his plan is to use Gators:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4273 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-20-2020 2:14 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4275 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 08-20-2020 3:25 PM Diomedes has replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 4279 of 4573 (881284)
08-21-2020 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 4275 by AnswersInGenitals
08-20-2020 3:25 PM


Re: Bannon arrested for fraud
It's actually worse then that. While the official border goes down the center of the Rio Grande, Trump's plan is to build the wall on the US side of the river, effectively ceding several square miles of US territory to Mexico
If that's the case, then I fully endorse using gators instead. Maybe we can go all Dr. Evil and fit them with lasers!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4275 by AnswersInGenitals, posted 08-20-2020 3:25 PM AnswersInGenitals has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024