US Politics

[do or die]

One would think that any American, regardless of political stripe......would be concerned about Russian attempts to influence the election, and would like actions taken, to defend against them in future.   Degrading and destroying confidence in democratic institutions, has always been a long term goal for the Kremlin.

Of course, the first step....would be for Trump to actually acknowledge that there is a problem.   Desisting from degrading and destroying public confidence in  American judicial and security institutions.....would be a pretty good 2nd step.

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, do or die said:

One would think that any American, regardless of political stripe......would be concerned about Russian attempts to influence the election, and would like actions taken, to defend against them in future.   Degrading and destroying confidence in democratic institutions, has always been a long term goal for the Kremlin.

Of course, the first step....would be for Trump to actually acknowledge that there is a problem.   Desisting from degrading and destroying public confidence in  American judicial and security institutions.....would be a pretty good 2nd step.

If I liked Trump as a simply the GOP guy...or if I liked some of his policies, it would still be shameless bias to act like the Russian interference is a non-story or that Trump is up to his eyeballs in it.  He refuses to enact sanctions that were overwhelmingly approved by Congress (including Republicans).  Its disgraceful.

[Atomic]

19 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Really?  So the answer is that none of the issues are redlines?  The racist policies, gun control inaction, criminal associations, Russia collusion, support for nazi's...thats all okay if the economy is good?  I mean, I commend you for your honesty if that is the case.

Not much of that is really new or unique to this administration.  And not one of those is affecting citizens on a day-to-day basis.  America's not perfect but that's not new and it's certainly not a reason to remove the president.

[The Unknown Poster]

16 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Trump is a vile human being, a wise guy from New Jersey with the morals to match. Every US president has had skeletons in their closet, some far more despicable than anything Trump is hiding.

Everyone knows the US interferes in foreign elections, they even interfered in our last election, using the same methods and even worse than what the Russians did. Putin absolutely despised Hillary and  there is no doubt he was behind smearing her. The US just got a taste of their own medicine for being the bullies on the block for the last 70 years and doing things without impunity. 

So besides telling us what we already knew, how is this helping to unite their country and end partisan politics?

 

Is your position that "yes Russia conspired with Trump associates to help him win but we know that so lets ignore it and unite"?  Regardless of perspective, its not the job of the citizens or Congress to unite.  They should compromise as best they can to advance good government but its not the minorities obligation to capitulate.  Thats sort of the point.

The time to "unite" in your contest is when the people who conspires are brought to justice and washed out of power.  If you believe Trump is complicit you cant take the position of "yeah he did it, but lets just move on" as tiresome as the whole thing might seem.  Its worth pursuing until justice is served.  If Trump is complicit (and he certainly is on some level) should he not be held accountable?

The issue is not just Russians meddling or influencing.  The allegations are about hacking, theft and other criminality.  Trump and his allies being potentially mobbed up.  Its far worse than Nixon.

If you feel about Trump the way you describe, why would you not want this to continue? Why would you belittle it?  Would you prefer a corrupt, criminal "vile wise guy" in power than the average Democrat?

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, Atomic said:

Not much of that is really new or unique to this administration.  And not one of those is affecting citizens on a day-to-day basis.  America's not perfect but that's not new and it's certainly not a reason to remove the president.

Actually colluding with Russia would be a reason to remove him.   So would obstruction of justice.  I'd assume money laundering would be as well.   It depends on your definition of an impeachable offense.  But you cant move the goalines because you dislike Democrat policies.  Clinton was impeached for lying about nailing an intern.

I do agree that his racism and bigotry are not impeachable.  Just things to remember come the next election. 

[Atomic]

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

Actually colluding with Russia would be a reason to remove him.   So would obstruction of justice.  I'd assume money laundering would be as well.   It depends on your definition of an impeachable offense.  But you cant move the goalines because you dislike Democrat policies.  Clinton was impeached for lying about nailing an intern.

I do agree that his racism and bigotry are not impeachable.  Just things to remember come the next election. 

I've still yet to see any proof of Russian collusion.  Yes it would appear that they interfered but I haven't seen the conclusive link to Trump.  That would probably be a good reason to remove him.  Just haven't seen it yet.

Otherwise I agree... let the next election decide.  As it should be.

[JCon]

22 minutes ago, pigseye said:

Trump is a vile human being, a wise guy from New Jersey with the morals to match. Every US president has had skeletons in their closet, some far more despicable than anything Trump is hiding.

Everyone knows the US interferes in foreign elections, they even interfered in our last election, using the same methods and even worse than what the Russians did. Putin absolutely despised Hillary and  there is no doubt he was behind smearing her. The US just got a taste of their own medicine for being the bullies on the block for the last 70 years and doing things without impunity. 

So besides telling us what we already knew, how is this helping to unite their country and end partisan politics?

 

Perhaps someone should be interested in how it was done and how to prevent it in the future?

 

"...some far more despicable..." I certainly don't know what Trump is hiding. But I do know what's out there for public consumption and that's about as horrible as one can be. 

 

I'm not sure how I would vote. Anything but Trump for sure. But how can you vote for a Democratic party who sees the right turn alt-right and instead of running to the middle, runs way out to the left?

It's time for a central party. The US system won't allow that.

31 minutes ago, Atomic said:

The country seems to be doing okay.  At least as well as it did with the last president.  So I don't really see the issue.

In what ways is the country doing okay? The changes that are being made will not be felt for quite some time. Trump's first budget is barely through.

[blue_gold_84]

39 minutes ago, JCon said:

It's time for a central party. The US system won't allow that.

Is centrism even a thing in politics anymore - anywhere?

Edited February 16, 2018 by blue_gold_84

[pigseye]

3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Is your position that "yes Russia conspired with Trump associates to help him win but we know that so lets ignore it and unite"?  Regardless of perspective, its not the job of the citizens or Congress to unite.  They should compromise as best they can to advance good government but its not the minorities obligation to capitulate.  Thats sort of the point.

The time to "unite" in your contest is when the people who conspires are brought to justice and washed out of power.  If you believe Trump is complicit you cant take the position of "yeah he did it, but lets just move on" as tiresome as the whole thing might seem.  Its worth pursuing until justice is served.  If Trump is complicit (and he certainly is on some level) should he not be held accountable?

The issue is not just Russians meddling or influencing.  The allegations are about hacking, theft and other criminality.  Trump and his allies being potentially mobbed up.  Its far worse than Nixon.

If you feel about Trump the way you describe, why would you not want this to continue? Why would you belittle it?  Would you prefer a corrupt, criminal "vile wise guy" in power than the average Democrat?

What I'm saying is that I, like Putin, am enjoying watching the US tear themselves up from the inside out. The dummies are the last ones to be feigning outrage over the behavior of a president or election interference and are just as complicit as any other US politician. 

The Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie-Mellon University, found that the U.S. attempted to influence the elections of foreign countries as many as 81 times between 1946 and 2000. That’s just till 2000! The US has gone nuts since then. Often covert in their execution, these efforts included everything from CIA operatives running successful presidential campaigns in the Philippines during the 1950s to leaking damaging information on Marxist Sandanistas in order to sway Nicaraguan voters in 1990. All told, the U.S. allegedly targeted the elections of 45 nations across the globe during this period. In the case of some countries, such as Italy and Japan, the U.S. attempted to intervene in four or more separate elections. Figures do not include military coups or regime change attempts following the election of a candidate the U.S. opposed, such as when the CIA helped overthrow Mohammad Mosaddeq, Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, in 1953. If we add those in, we’re looking at the entire Earth having suffered from US meddling.

If the Democrats had the the countries 'interests' at heart, they would pushing for unity now more than ever instead of fanning the flames for their own political gain. 

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, pigseye said:

What I'm saying is that I, like Putin, am enjoying watching the US tear themselves up from the inside out. The dummies are the last ones to be feigning outrage over the behavior of a president or election interference and are just as complicit as any other US politician. 

The Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie-Mellon University, found that the U.S. attempted to influence the elections of foreign countries as many as 81 times between 1946 and 2000. That’s just till 2000! The US has gone nuts since then. Often covert in their execution, these efforts included everything from CIA operatives running successful presidential campaigns in the Philippines during the 1950s to leaking damaging information on Marxist Sandanistas in order to sway Nicaraguan voters in 1990. All told, the U.S. allegedly targeted the elections of 45 nations across the globe during this period. In the case of some countries, such as Italy and Japan, the U.S. attempted to intervene in four or more separate elections. Figures do not include military coups or regime change attempts following the election of a candidate the U.S. opposed, such as when the CIA helped overthrow Mohammad Mosaddeq, Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, in 1953. If we add those in, we’re looking at the entire Earth having suffered from US meddling.

If the Democrats had the the countries 'interests' at heart, they would pushing for unity now more than ever instead of fanning the flames for their own political gain. 

Whataboutism isnt an answer. 

Do the rest of us a favour though, if you are going to drag the discussion down to name calling, just avoid posting.  I asked you a serious question with legitimate interest and you havent been able to provide a rational reply.  If the intent is to create a scenario where this thread gets nukes, lets try to avoid that.  Although I appreciate the comparison to Russia election meddling with posters on a sports forum creating posts designed to get the thread locked lol

Essentially you're saying that you are perfectly fine with Russia conspiring with a candidate to get him elected to leverage potential blackmail material to get what they want...as long as the winner is the one you wanted to win anyway?  You're perfectly entitled to that opinion but it doesnt lend itself to any legitimate discussion, in my humble opinion.

If you ultimately feel like Trump sucks but who cares about the greater issues, than why post here?  Let the rest of us who are interested continue to post and discuss.  Thanks!

[blue_gold_84]

9 minutes ago, pigseye said:

If the Democrats had the the countries 'interests' at heart, they would pushing for unity now more than ever instead of fanning the flames for their own political gain. 

The same could've been said for the Republicans when Obama was in office for eight years. Or likewise the previous eight before those when Bush Jr. was POTUS.

It doesn't matter who's in power in the US: that nation remains as divided as ever. And the unfortunate reality is the divide only grows with each passing day.

Edited February 16, 2018 by blue_gold_84

[voodoochylde]

Guys, I understand that discussing politics can often be a heated and divisive subject but I would ask that you treat one another with respect and attempt to further the conversation rather than 'attack' individual posters (or insult those who may not agree with your particular view).  If you can't discuss the topic without resorting to name calling or other base dialogue, perhaps this topic isn't for you.

 

[do or die]

Keep the sandbox clean.....

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, do or die said:

Keep the sandbox clean.....

I sort of see this as historically significant.  Like if this forum existed during the time of Nixon.  It DOES surprise me that anyone would actually defend Trump at this stage.  Though I am very happy if fellow conservatives engage in nuanced discussion.

As I said earlier though, and Ill open myself up to attack by saying I was a W. supporter, if I was a US voter, there are several redline issues for me that would make me vote Dem.  And one of them, the latest one is gun control.  I could not vote for a party that is okay with dead children over banning assault weapons.  That would be a redline issue for me.

When there is a Democrat President, Im sure this thread will have plenty of use then too.  Crappy politics is not the exclusive domain of either party.

[pigseye]

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Whataboutism isnt an answer. 

Do the rest of us a favour though, if you are going to drag the discussion down to name calling, just avoid posting.  I asked you a serious question with legitimate interest and you havent been able to provide a rational reply.  If the intent is to create a scenario where this thread gets nukes, lets try to avoid that.  Although I appreciate the comparison to Russia election meddling with posters on a sports forum creating posts designed to get the thread locked lol

Essentially you're saying that you are perfectly fine with Russia conspiring with a candidate to get him elected to leverage potential blackmail material to get what they want...as long as the winner is the one you wanted to win anyway?  You're perfectly entitled to that opinion but it doesnt lend itself to any legitimate discussion, in my humble opinion.

If you ultimately feel like Trump sucks but who cares about the greater issues, than why post here?  Let the rest of us who are interested continue to post and discuss.  Thanks!

As I already said:

1. The FBI knew even before the election that the Russians were meddling, this goes on in every election everywhere in the world, with the US being by far the worst culprit, so nothing to see here;

2. If Trumps campaign conspired with the Russians for dirt on Hilary, that's the way politics works, Trumps lawyers will claim plausible deniability and again, nothing to see here;

3. Just because my humble opinion may be different than yours, you should still respect it, as I do yours, even if I don't agree with it;

4. Just because I think Trump is vile human being, doesn't mean that he wasn't the best candidate for president, unless your only criteria was the party or who the nicest candidate is, fortunately most voters vote on the issues and not just if the candidate has nice hair;

I will ask you straight up, since my subtle attempts have failed, do you honestly believe this whole thing isn't just partisan politics or are the Democrats somehow 'too good' to play those kinds of games in your mind?

[johnzo]

1 hour ago, Atomic said:

I've still yet to see any proof of Russian collusion.  Yes it would appear that they interfered but I haven't seen the conclusive link to Trump.  That would probably be a good reason to remove him.  Just haven't seen it yet.

Otherwise I agree... let the next election decide.  As it should be.

There is definitely collusion smoke but I agree, no collusion fire yet.  There are still Trump campaign people who have stories to tell about this, so we'll see.

I very much doubt Trump will ever be impeached.  Impeachment requires a supermajority of the Senate and Republicans have no interest in defying the Trump personality cult.  Should he be impeached?  Russian collusion aside, the self-dealing of government money into Trump properties may rise to the level of impeach-worthy.  But there's no red line law about removing a President. Congress and / or  the Cabinet could remove Trump tomorrow because they think he should prefer redheads, and he'd have no recourse.  The American executive is both weirdly weak and invincibly untouchable.

I think the best possible result is that we elect a ton of dems in 2018, Trump spins his wheels in the DC mud for three more years, somehow (cross fingers) there are no giant more crises that critically require American leadership (beyond Puerto Rico, which is a disgrace) and we elect someone better in 2020.

To be fair to pigseye, a lot of my more-leftist friends like to make the point that, to a Chilean of a certain age, American outrage over foreign election interference is hilarious/infuriating. This country has filthy hands, especially in Central America, South America, and the Philippines.  That doesn't mean I'm cool with a kleptocrat gangster like Putin pulling the strings on American elections, though -- that's very unlikely to make anything better.

If Americans, left and right, weren't so vulnerable to agitprop, this country would be in a lot better place. 

Edited February 16, 2018 by johnzo

[bustamente]

 

Are Kushner and Don Jr. going to go before Mueller, because he is going to twist those two into a pretzel, they are not as smart as they think they are.

[do or die]

Collusion is probably the most difficult charge to make stick, because of all the moving parts, and in this case - buffers - from a judicial point of view.   
However, events over the past year, plus what has come out of Trump's own mouth.....have provide a certain amount of circumstantial evidence and some proof of intent .....to make obstruction of justice, a real possibility.   That is if Mueller can get a certain level of collaboration from witnesses.

Still think that the ole money trail.....which takes a great deal of research and time - will eventually yield some pretty interesting stuff..... about certain relationships between the Trump family and some Russian political and criminal interests.

 

[do or die]

6 minutes ago, bustamente said:

 

Are Kushner and Don Jr. going to go before Mueller, because he is going to twist those two into a pretzel, they are not as smart as they think they are.

Don Jr. invited Mueller, a while back to "come for him".   This may prove to be a singularly bad idea.

[bustamente]

1 minute ago, do or die said:

Don Jr. invited Mueller, a while back to "come for him".   This may prove to be a singularly bad idea.

Especially when he asks him why he needed a secure line to Russian during the campaign.

[do or die]

9 minutes ago, bustamente said:

 

Are Kushner and Don Jr. going to go before Mueller, because he is going to twist those two into a pretzel, they are not as smart as they think they are.

I think the flipping of Gates - Paul Manafort’s right hand man, during his past decade of lobbying and foreign work - puts him in the next set of cross hairs.    Mueller may be able to double down on the indictments against Manifort - then invite him back for an interview, to see if he is more willing to play some ball.....

[The Unknown Poster]

18 minutes ago, pigseye said:

As I already said:

1. The FBI knew even before the election that the Russians were meddling, this goes on in every election everywhere in the world, with the US being by far the worst culprit, so nothing to see here;

2. If Trumps campaign conspired with the Russians for dirt on Hilary, that's the way politics works, Trumps lawyers will claim plausible deniability and again, nothing to see here;

3. Just because my humble opinion may be different than yours, you should still respect it, as I do yours, even if I don't agree with it;

4. Just because I think Trump is vile human being, doesn't mean that he wasn't the best candidate for president, unless your only criteria was the party or who the nicest candidate is, fortunately most voters vote on the issues and not just if the candidate has nice hair;

I will ask you straight up, since my subtle attempts have failed, do you honestly believe this whole thing isn't just partisan politics or are the Democrats somehow 'too good' to play those kinds of games in your mind?

1. Yes they did.  And launched an investigation.  The FBI didnt shrug and say "its just politics".  There are multiple congressional investigations and a Special Counsel investigation going on BECAUSE this wasnt politics as normal.

2.  Its not. And it's illegal.  And the subject to multiple investigations.  You seem to think the investigations shoudl be shut down because "nothing to see here" but why not let them continue to their inevitable conclusion?  The whole point of what Mueller is doing is to build a case so it doesnt matter what Trump says.  Ofcourse he's going to deny.  If you were accused of a crime, you'd deny it too...

3. Im a conservative.  I supported W.  I wish Harper was PM today, tomorrow and forever.  I get the right wing perspective.  Thats not the issue.

4. Again, the original question posed what what is your Red-Line?  What would it take?  I dont think Hilary is the nicest candidate.  I dont even care.  I dont know her.  If we dug far enough back, Im, quite sure I was warm on Trump initially.  I recall telling a friend (who is gay and hated Trump from Day 1) that he should not be too hasty and I defended trump...to my GAY friend lol  But again, its Red Lines.  He's vile.  Is he MORE vile than Hilary.  Thats a different debate. 

To answer your question, I guarantee it isnt partisan politics.  If it is, its REPUBLICANS.  You have a Republican FBI Director (who, by the way, sunk Hilary with the last minute e-mails memo to Congress which turned out to be nothing), a Republican AG, a Republican Deputy AG, a Republican Special Counsel.  And the only issue on the part of the FBI was out of the New York office which was aligned with Rudy who was aligned with Trump and seemingly buried information in favour of Trump.  What partisan politics are you referring to?  This whole thing is driven by Republicans.

[The Unknown Poster]

25 minutes ago, johnzo said:

There is definitely collusion smoke but I agree, no collusion fire yet.  There are still Trump campaign people who have stories to tell about this, so we'll see.

I very much doubt Trump will ever be impeached.  Impeachment requires a supermajority of the Senate and Republicans have no interest in defying the Trump personality cult.  Should he be impeached?  Russian collusion aside, the self-dealing of government money into Trump properties may rise to the level of impeach-worthy.  But there's no red line law about removing a President. Congress and / or  the Cabinet could remove Trump tomorrow because they think he should prefer redheads, and he'd have no recourse.  The American executive is both weirdly weak and invincibly untouchable.

I think the best possible result is that we elect a ton of dems in 2018, Trump spins his wheels in the DC mud for three more years, somehow (cross fingers) there are no giant more crises that critically require American leadership (beyond Puerto Rico, which is a disgrace) and we elect someone better in 2020.

To be fair to pigseye, a lot of my more-leftist friends like to make the point that, to a Chilean of a certain age, American outrage over election interference is hilarious/infuriating. This country has filthy hands, especially in Central America, South America, and the Philippines.  That doesn't mean I'm cool with a kleptocrat gangster like Putin pulling the strings on American elections, though -- that's very unlikely to make anything better.

If Americans, left and right, weren't so vulnerable to agitprop, this country would be in a lot better place. 

If the Dems take the House, impeachment becomes more likely.  You only require a simple majority in the House to actually Impeach a President.  Its the trial in the Senate that requires 2/3 and is highly, highly unlikely that the Dems would have a simple majority, let alone a super majority.  However, if trump was impeached with compelling evidence, the fact many Republicans go-along with him and dont embrace him, its possible the Senate would convict him in favour of Pence.  If they feel that Trump was an anchor on all of them, you never know.

More likely, he'd be Impeached but not convicted, just as Clinton was.  And by the way, the Senate trial would be presided over by the Chief Justice who was a Republican apointee.

I do disagree that Cabinet could remove him tomorrow.  Its very complicated and can result in a congressional trial.  And I dont think the Cabinet, even if they despised the President would go along with a coup, even if they felt it was deserved.  He'd have to be really, really incapacitated, not just an *******. 

The 25th is for incapacitation, not removing a duly elected President for being a ****.  Even if he's a criminal, thats up to Impeachment.

And to reiterate my position, if Trump came out tomorrow and admitted he was a racist etc, thats not good enough for me to remove him in any way but an election.

But...should Mueller recommend charges for Obstruction, Collusion, Laundering etc, then he should be removed by means of Impeachment.

[The Unknown Poster]

17 minutes ago, do or die said:

I think the flipping of Gates - Paul Manafort’s right hand man, during his past decade of lobbying and foreign work - puts him in the next set of cross hairs.    Mueller may be able to double down on the indictments against Manifort - then invite him back for an interview, to see if he is more willing to play some ball.....

I agree.  Could be the biggest news going.  Gates knows things.  And it applies TONS of pressure to Manifort.  Now, Trump could pardon them.  But the same is true of Gates who seemingly would rather flip then be loyal and count on a pardon. 

 

25 minutes ago, do or die said:

Collusion is probably the most difficult charge to make stick, because of all the moving parts, and in this case - buffers - from a judicial point of view.   
However, events over the past year, plus what has come out of Trump's own mouth.....have provide a certain amount of circumstantial evidence and some proof of intent .....to make obstruction of justice, a real possibility.   That is if Mueller can get a certain level of collaboration from witnesses.

Still think that the ole money trail.....which takes a great deal of research and time - will eventually yield some pretty interesting stuff..... about certain relationships between the Trump family and some Russian political and criminal interests.

 

Remember, it wasnt the crime that got Nixon, but the cover-up.  Trump may never be charged with collusion.  It might be accepted that it happened, but Meuller might recommend money laundering charges that are related to business ties with Russia.  And Trump can then argue it has nothing to do with Russia meddling in the election, but it wont matter.  A crime is a crime.

 

21 minutes ago, bustamente said:

Especially when he asks him why he needed a secure line to Russian during the campaign.

I believe we can all agree Don Jr is not a genius.

For me, if Mueller gets closer and closer to Trump (and he seems to be by the people charged or flipped), if he gets Kushner, it gets really interesting.  I assume Don Jr would gladly go to prison for his dad.  Kushner?  Not so much.  Plus, he has a ton of his own family business relationships that could suffer.  If Mueller gets anything on Kushner, things take an interesting turn.

[do or die]

Meanwhile Bannon spends two full days with Mueller, to avoid public testimony in front of the grand jury......then afterwards, continues to freeze out the Congressional Committee, on the Hill.   

Some folks should be real worried about this......particularly Kushner.