Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Impeachable? Does this change anyones lens? Probably not...
#1
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is defending the hush money payments made by his former lawyer to two women during his 2016 campaign as "a simple private transaction." He tweeted Monday that if there was wrongdoing, it's lawyer Michael Cohen's "liability" and not his.
Federal prosecutors said in a court filing Friday that Cohen "acted with the intent to influence the 2016 presidential election" and at the direction of Trump when he brokered deals to stop women from going public about their alleged affairs with Trump.
Trump has argued that the payments — which he first denied knowledge of — weren't campaign contributions because his own money and not campaign funds were used for the payments.
But federal law requires disclosure of payments made "for the purposes of influencing" an election.
Reply

#2
3,2,1...

Insert "Lewinsky Comments" here
Reply

#3
it looks like the beginning of the end. any rational actual America loving citizen should be glad that we are approaching the end of this strange time period. 

country first, bi partisan politics second
Reply

#4
We can't get rid of this embarrassing, shit stain on our history fast enough. 
Reply

#5
Quote: @Skodin said:

country first, bi partisan politics second

This I completely concur with...

Such a divided country now.

Waiting for some kind of unifying figure and agenda, but I don't see it yet.  It won't be Biden and it won't be Trump.

Don't think Beto has the kahuna's for a presidential bid by 2020. 
Reply

#6
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
@Skodin said:

country first, bi partisan politics second

This I completely concur with...

Such a divided country now.

Waiting for some kind of unifying figure and agenda, but I don't see it yet.  It won't be Biden and it won't be Trump.

Don't think Beto has the kahuna's for a presidential bid by 2020. 
I think it's wrong to characterize this as a red/blue divide. So many on the right are just as horrified by Trump as those of us on the left. It's more MAGA'merica...vs. everyone else.

I don't know if he has the kahunas, but Beto's got a message that will resonate among those who are tired of the divide. It's very Obama-like. And he came within a razor-thin margin of Cruz..in TEXAS. That kind of appeal in a deep-red state will translate well in a national election.

But even if Trump makes it through his first term, I'd be surprised if he ran in '20. Though I guess one could argue that if it's decided that a president can't be indicted, "Very Stable Genius" may find that running (and winning) is the only way to keep himself out of jail....for the time being. 
Reply

#7
collusion? nope
obstruction?  nada
NDA's?  lmao

Go ahead and draw up impeachment....guarantee his second term.  Go ahead.  

Hey maybe you can get your comrade Macron.  You know, the Patriot?  Should  be available soon, 
if he can get out of gay Paris with his head.  

Some truth the MSM won't tell you

1. A sitting president CANNOT be indicted. That’s official DOJ policy since 1973. Neither the Special Counsel nor the Southern District of New York (SDNY) nor Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein can defy that 45-year-old policy.
2. SDNY is NOT expert in campaign finance violations and neither is the Clinton appointed district judge. They rarely handle campaign finance cases. The left-wing media and politicians are regurgitating what the prosecutors have merely filed in their own self-serving brief. The media and others intentionally refuse to look at the actual rules and context. They refuse to even question what these prosecutors have thrown together.
3. The actual campaign rules and context do NOT include Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) or infinite other contracts, payments, arrangements, acts of a private nature, etc. as campaign contributions. This is normal human behavior and was never intended to be regulated or reported. SDNY is dead wrong. And these private payments can be made in any manner or any amount. Again, they’re private payments involving private matters. To underscore, there’s no reporting requirement because they’re not campaign payments made with or without campaign funds.
4. SDNY inclusion of these charges in the Cohen plea deal was a sleazy political and PR attack against the president by an office coordinating with Mueller and aligned with Comey. SDNY knew Cohen would plead. It, therefore, knew its absurd allegations would not be tested in any courtroom — district, circuit or Supreme Court. If they were tested, SDNY would be hammered like a nail. But it knew the left-wing media and politicians would use the mere over-the-top allegations from its office, with absolutely nothing more, to claim the president committed campaign felonies. No due process. No assumption of innocence. They knew they couldn’t charge a sitting president. Thus, they convict the president in the press, not only an extreme act of professional misconduct but a violation of the very purpose of the DOJ memos banning the indictment of a sitting president while effectively indicting him in the court of public opinion, and watch as untold numbers of media personalities and former members of the SDNY, among others, use this dirty work to predict or demand the president’s indictment and/or impeachment.
5. As for impeachment, NDAs involving wholly private matters occurring before the president was even a candidate and completely unrelated to his office cannot legitimately trigger the Constitution's impeachment clause. Indeed, they could not be more irrelevant. The history of the clause and its “high crimes and misdemeanors” language make it crystal clear that the office and the president’s duties are not affected in any conceivable way by these earlier private contracts. Of course, Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler, another NYC radical, could not care less. He’s more than thrilled to be an executioner in this French Revolution redux. The Constitution be damned. Meanwhile, he and the others wave around the Constitution as if they’re defending it against a tyrant. It is they who are the tyrants.

Reply

#8
It's pretty strange how some folks just can't comprehend, reality.  Read a great piece how fake news has been sold, and why some folks never get it.  Has to do with the Dunning-Kruger effect, cool observation, not a physical law, but very repeatable.  Gets to the etymology of sophomore, the old adage that a little knowledge goes along way and the comfort and safety of being in a large perceived group, that the internet provides.
Reply

#9
Impeach yes they could, remove no. Hasn't been that long. Don't we remember? Impeachment takes a simple majority in the House. Removal takes 2/3 vote in Senate. 
I don't believe they will impeach. They will attemp to embarrass. The House gets to control what, where and who gets investigated.  They will only use that power to expose his seedy side.  Again we don't remember? The Presidents biggest worry is that his Nunes firewall of protection has been taken down. The good news for the President. Morals and character that used to be soo important no longer matters. Or does it? Remember we decide. 
If history repeats itself. It is about to. Those men who exposed the last time were eventually exposed themselves. Not even all with women, sadder not even all with adults. This is going to be popcorn time for some. Then end there with a choice to be made. By us.
Reply

#10
Meanwhile the bond yield curve has inverted, deficit spending has accelerated, alienated everyone except Russia, China and the Saudis...  Good thing though we all still have a lot of guns.  Call it popcorn time or stomping your Johnson, we are heading where we end up.  
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
4 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 Melroy van den Berg.