Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by gcomeau   » Mon Jul 10, 2017 4:56 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm



Hey there's the rationalization I was waiting for.


You do get that that entire article is only trying to argue that yeah... they did it... but technically it wasn't "Treason".... just colluding with a hostile foreign government that waged a cyber warfare campaign against the United States to interfere in American elections.

So.... that is totally ok then? Is that your position?


And Dershowitz sure tries to have it both ways there, talking about "both sides" throwing around accusations while kind of running really fast by the fact that the guy he's talking about accusing Donald Jr. of brushing up against Treason is a Republican who worked for the Bush administration.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by biochem   » Mon Jul 10, 2017 10:39 pm

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA

gcomeau wrote:


Hey there's the rationalization I was waiting for.


You do get that that entire article is only trying to argue that yeah... they did it... but technically it wasn't "Treason".... just colluding with a hostile foreign government that waged a cyber warfare campaign against the United States to interfere in American elections.

So.... that is totally ok then? Is that your position?


And Dershowitz sure tries to have it both ways there, talking about "both sides" throwing around accusations while kind of running really fast by the fact that the guy he's talking about accusing Donald Jr. of brushing up against Treason is a Republican who worked for the Bush administration.


http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/ ... r-beating/
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by gcomeau   » Mon Jul 10, 2017 11:18 pm

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm



Are you posting that for entertainment, or are you saying you actually believe that giant collection of bullshit?
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Eyal   » Tue Jul 11, 2017 1:33 am

Eyal
Commander

Posts: 184
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:09 pm
Location: Israel

gcomeau wrote:


Are you posting that for entertainment, or are you saying you actually believe that giant collection of bullshit?


While it could be a coincidence, it's curious to note that apparently Trump (Sr's) first tweet on Clinton's emails was sent the same day as Trump Jr's meeting (I can't see twitter from this computer, but googling "how long did it take your staff of 823" should bring it up - tweet from June 9, 2016, 4:40 PM)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Tenshinai   » Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:29 am

Tenshinai
Admiral

Posts: 2859
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:34 pm
Location: Sweden

gcomeau wrote:And the Trump team now admits to not only meeting with Russian representative, but doing so *specifically* with the intent of trying to procure damaging intel on Clinton from a foreign power.


So to keep score... we have now moved from "Colluding with the Russians! WE WOULD NEVER! FAKE NEWS!!!!!!".... to "Ok so we tried to collude with the Russians, but they had nothing useful for us we double pinky swear! So it's all fine... see?"


Still ok with this Trump supporters? Let's hear the rationalizations from Team Patriotism.


Seriously, take a deep breath and cool down.

So, what was his statement?
>>>“After pleasantries were exchanged,” he said, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”<<<

Yup, total confession, except no.

Then we have the part about who she is.
A lawyer with an axe to grind(and getting well paid for it due to being hired by the people the USA illegally stole the US assets of(crooked people, no doubt there, but the US presidential fiat theft was pure theft zero law)). And long since infamous for getting people to at least listen ( possibly by paralyzing them by making their ears bleed (sarcasm...)).

However, despite how much various articles throw "Kreml-connected" around, she's about as much that as at least 20% of the US lawyers are "White House-connected".

You do get that that entire article is only trying to argue that yeah... they did it... but technically it wasn't "Treason".... just colluding with a hostile foreign government that waged a cyber warfare campaign against the United States to interfere in American elections.


Riiight...

You do realise that there's still not even a HINT of fact that suggests that the RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT had anything at all to do with it, and that it is still not even remotely shown even that it DID happen?

Where did you rational mind go? Do you leave it behind when it comes to politics?

talking about accusing Donald Jr. of brushing up against Treason is a Republican who worked for the Bush administration.


Uh, why don't you explain exactly how Don boy got close to treason? Legally.
Because even if EVERY SINGLE THING that has been claimed and thrown around is 100% true, that still doesn't make him a traitor or legally guilty of treason.
Which makes a lot of your statements hyperbole at best, defamation and crap at worst.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:07 am

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

Tenshinai wrote:
gcomeau wrote:And the Trump team now admits to not only meeting with Russian representative, but doing so *specifically* with the intent of trying to procure damaging intel on Clinton from a foreign power.


So to keep score... we have now moved from "Colluding with the Russians! WE WOULD NEVER! FAKE NEWS!!!!!!".... to "Ok so we tried to collude with the Russians, but they had nothing useful for us we double pinky swear! So it's all fine... see?"


Still ok with this Trump supporters? Let's hear the rationalizations from Team Patriotism.


Seriously, take a deep breath and cool down.

So, what was his statement?
>>>“After pleasantries were exchanged,” he said, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”<<<

Yup, total confession, except no.


Except... yes.

The entire Trump campaign has been denying any meetings with Russian nationals about campaign issues.

Trump Jr. just admitted to lying about this for the last many months. And he admitted Kushner lied because he was in the meeting too. And he admitted Manafort lied because he was in the meeting too. And some of those lies were on Federal security clearance paperwork where they are required to list meetings they had with Russian nationals. Sure as fuck Russian nationals they discussed US policy relative to Russia with. Confession. And that just adds to the apparently never ending list of times that Trump people lied about meeting with Russians during the campaign. It's like one of the defining characteristics of someone associated with the Trump campaign at this point, someone who had a meeting with Russian nationals during that campaign then lied about it until they got caught lying.


He admitted that he held this meeting with a Russian national with the *explicit intention* of procuring damaging information about Clinton to use in the campaign. Which the Trump people have up until now been outraged at the very suggestion of and denied adamantly. Confession.


He admitted he was discussing US policy issues with said Russian national at the same time ("Russian adoption" is the Russians freezing all US adoptions of Russian kids in retaliation for the Magnitsky Act sanctions. Or did you think Trump Jr, Kushner and Manafort ALL took a meeting with some Russian lawyer because they thought she maybe had a good two for one deal on some nice little orphan kids they might be interested in? That is a top level presidential campaign staff meeting, it doesn't happen to chat Russian orphans it happens to chat matters of consequence the campaign is taking seriously and if you think otherwise you are being hilariously obtuse). Confession.


Those both happening in the same meeting establishes grounds for suspecting that discussion of a quid pro quo occured.


Riiight...

You do realise that there's still not even a HINT of fact that suggests that the RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT had anything at all to do with it, and that it is still not even remotely shown even that it DID happen?


What "It"?

The election hacking and interference? Because get the hell over it, it happened. Practically the only people on planet earth who still deny it are Trump (occasionally, when he isn't admitting it happened) and the Russians. The fact that you continue to deny it only speaks to your own credibility on the issue.


talking about accusing Donald Jr. of brushing up against Treason is a Republican who worked for the Bush administration.


Uh, why don't you explain exactly how Don boy got close to treason? Legally.


*I* didn't call it Treason.

But if the charges that the Trump campaign worked to collude with a nation that was launching a cyber warfare campaign against the United States are true treason does actually fall within the realm of credible charges... it might be developing some new precedents as to how seriously we take cyber warfare relative to the bombs and bullets kind if those charges were pursued one day...
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by gcomeau   » Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:51 am

gcomeau
Commodore

Posts: 948
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

Oopsie... Trump Jr's e-mail chain setting up the meeting just came out. This is what Trump Jr. was told to get him to take the meeting, along with Kushner and Manafort:


https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/stat ... 66/photo/1


"This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump..."


He was told that. Then he took the meeting. Manafort took the meeting. Kushner took the meeting. They didn't call the FBI, they leaped in EAGERLY then lied and lied and lied to try to cover it up right until today.


What was that Trump apologists were trying to spin? All just a random innocent conversation about Russian orphans was it?


(But then if this was incriminating why did Trump Jr release them himself on twitter?????" you might ask. The Times had the e-mails, they started releasing info on their contents today. He's trying to get ahead of it but there's nothing to be done at this point that I can see. Mueller is going to be *all over* this.)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by cthia   » Tue Jul 11, 2017 3:30 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 7585
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 1:10 pm

President Richard Nixon was not impeached. On July 27, 1974, the House Judiciary Committee recommended the impeachment and removal from office of president for obstructing justice, abuse of power and contempt of Congress. Before the required vote, Nixon resigned, effective Aug. 9, 1974.


Sound familiar?

Tricky Dick? A criminal? A crook? It seems like many people are going to owe Nixon an apology. A posthumous apology. :lol:

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by biochem   » Thu Jul 13, 2017 10:02 pm

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA

So back to the Obamacare repeal bill since that seems to be coming up for a vote again. If I were a senator, would I vote for the current version? Answer - no. It just kicks the can down the road and has a lot of problematic structural issues. But I would vote for it if the added a single provision: the federal government is REQUIRED to issue a waiver to any and all provisions in this bill to any state whose citizens vote for a waiver in an initiative or referendum with a quorum of 55% of registered voters.

The requirement for a vote of the citizens keeps the politicians from requesting a waiver against the will of their constituents. The 55% requirement (about how many voters typically vote in a major election), keeps the politicians from doing something sneaky such as hold an election when people aren't expecting it. And yes the USA does have low voter participation. The reqirement also ensures that any waiver request will have the mandate of the people and the opposition won't be able to claim otherwise.

This way states on either side of the political spectrum can opt out if they can make a good case to their own voters. The right wing states could go back to the original plan and the far left states could try single payer (California keeps blathering on about it, this is their chance to put up or shut up. California politicians will probably hate the idea since it is much easier to blather than to follow through.)
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Daryl   » Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:05 am

Daryl
Admiral

Posts: 2175
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Queensland Australia

"SIX MONTHS into his presidency, Donald Trump is officially the least popular US leader of the past 70 years, according to a new poll. A Gallup poll conducted at the six-month mark of all presidents since Harry S Truman has found Trump has just a 36 per cent approval rating, down six points on a similar poll conducted at his first 100 days."
and "Of those polled, 58 per cent disapproved of him, well up on the previous disapproval record of 51 per cent held by Bill Clinton since 1993."

If I was a Republican looking at mid term reelection, I'd be starting to think very carefully.
Top

Return to Politics