Cable Forum - President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33705924)

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35933301)

It's fair to say, they obstruct each other and have been doing so for years, it's a big problem with having a two-party system in government.

While the Media may dis Trump for having around a 40% Approval rating, Congress itself has only an 18% approval rating, which highlights how the legislative branch is dysfunctional, because where they are at now, in the middle of another government shutdown.

What do you think the solution is if they won't play nicely, they don't want to go through this every few years, it makes them a laughing stock and causes unnecessary hardship when we all know they'll come to a deal in the end

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Bit by bit the jig-saw pieces are fitting together and more dots appear to be able to be joined up...as to just what I suspected of happening all along, during the U.S Election in 2016!!!

Was Lynch coordinating with Comey in the Clinton investigation?

Quote:

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch knew well in advance of FBI Director James Comey's 2016 press conference that he would recommend against charging Hillary Clinton, according to information turned over to the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Friday.

The revelation was included in 384 pages of text messages exchanged between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and it significantly diminishes the credibility of Lynch's earlier commitment to accept Comey's recommendation — a commitment she made under the pretense that the two were not coordinating with each other.

And it gets worse. Comey and Lynch reportedly knew that Clinton would never face charges even before the FBI conducted its three-hour interview with Clinton, which was supposedly meant to gather more information into her mishandling of classified information.

On July 1, 2016, as the Lynch announcement became public, Page texted Strzok:

Page: And yeah, it’s a real profile in couragw [sic], since she knows no charges will be brought.

There are other revelations within the text messages. But in the cover letter accompanying them, the FBI notified Congress that many additional text messages are missing. According to the FBI, its “technical system for retaining text messages sent and received on FBI mobile devices failed to preserve text messages for Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page from December 14, 2016 to approximately to May 17, 2017.”

<snip>

So let me get this straight, there are Text messages disappearing, right up to the same day, Robert Mueller is brought in as special counsel, May 17th, 2017.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mueller

Special Counsel for the Department of Justice
Incumbent
Assumed office
May 17, 2017

What a hell of a coincidence.

Quote:

Strzok and Page communicated in a voluminous fashion via text message while allegedly having an illicit affair. Strzok was a key figure in the Hillary Clinton exoneration and reportedly interviewed President Trump's former national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (which resulted in Flynn pleading guilty to lying to the FBI). Until last summer, Strzok and Page were both members of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating the allegations of collusion between Russia and Trump's campaign. Neither has been accused of wrongdoing.

The text messages seem to indicate that some within the FBI were making investigatory decisions based on Trump’s ascendancy among the Republican field of presidential candidates.

On May 4, 2016 Strzok and Page had the following text message exchange:

Page: And holy shit Cruz just dropped out of the race. It’s going to be a Clinton Trump race. Unbelievable.

Strzok: What?!?!??

Page: You heard it right my friend.

Strzok: I saw trump won, figured it would be a bit…Now the pressure really starts to finish MYE…

Page: It sure does. We need to talk about follow up call tomorrow.

“MYE” stands for “midyear exam” and was the FBI case name for the Clinton email investigation.

<snip>

In previous text messages produced to the House of Representatives, Strzok and Page discussed needing an “insurance policy” in the event Trump were to become president. The newest batch of text messages turned over on Friday show that in February of 2016, Page texted Strzok that then-candidate Trump “simply can not [sic] be president.”

Any neutral observer would have to be concerned about supposed missing evidence from a premier law enforcement and intel collection agency as well as the types of discussions and conflicts of interest apparently at issue with key officials within the FBI. It’s one more piece of a developing story that unfortunately points to alleged misconduct by some at top levels in our intelligence community. If the allegations bear out, it could have huge implications for a number of investigations handled by the officials in question over the past decade — not just cases related to the 2016 campaign.

http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/...-investigation

Chairman of Homeland Security Committee in the U.S Senate, has sent the following letter of concern to Christopher Wray, FBI Director regarding his concerns...

https://www.scribd.com/document/3696...dium=affiliate

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Shutdown over, Enough Dems will back the CR.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35933427)

Shutdown over, Enough Dems will back the CR.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...o-end-shutdown

Quote:

Senate Democrats say they are accepting a deal with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for an immigration vote, clearing the way for passage of a bill to reopen the federal government.

McConnell early Monday promised to take up an immigration bill that would protect an estimated 800,000 Dreamers from deportation, under an open amendment process, if Democrats would agree to end the government shutdown.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y) said that pledge was enough for his caucus to accept a three-week government funding bill, which is now set to pass at noon.

"After several discussions, offers and counteroffers, the Republican leader and I have come to an arrangement. We will vote today to reopen the government to continue negotiating a global agreement," Schumer said.

If lawmakers aren't able to get an immigration bill as part of that larger agreement by Feb. 8, the Senate would then take up a separate bill and "the process will be neutral and fair to all sides," Schumer added.

I wonder if Trump and/or the House Republicans will accept this?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

They’ll lose that bill.

Still the Democrats probably lost their nerve, the minority leader was under pressure from Democrats defending their seats in Red states this November, and this at least gives them an out.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35933433)

Well, if they don't do it in three weeks, the Dems can say "we kept the Government going, and now the Republicans aren't keeping their promises".

The amusing thing is that the Republicans only need 51 votes in the Senate to pass a Budget Bill, but never put one together, continuing to rely on CRs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconc...tates_Congress)

Quote:

Congress passes a budget resolution, with a deadline of April 15. No presidential signature is needed; sometimes the resolution is delayed or never passed.

The budget goes to both houses.

It goes to the Senate with a special rule: it can pass with 51 votes and cannot be filibustered. Other legislation can be filibustered and requires 60 votes to end the filibuster.

The budget cannot affect entitlements such as Medicare unless the budget includes "reconciliation instructions." In that case, the Byrd rule applies and the primary result must be to reduce entitlement spending. Gregg notes, "If the budget calls for more revenue to reduce the deficit, then reconciliation can be used to produce that revenue via fees or taxes." A reconciliation instruction is a provision in a budget resolution directing one or more committees to submit legislation changing existing law in order to bring spending, tax revenues, or the debt ceiling into conformity with the budget resolution. The instructions specify the committees to which they apply, indicate the appropriate dollar changes to be achieved, and usually provide a deadline by which the legislation is to be reported or submitted.

After the changes are made, the Budget Committees consolidate them into one bill that is voted on by both houses; it needs 51 Senate votes.

The final reconciliation covers government spending and goes to the president who can sign it or veto it; the veto can be overturned by a two-thirds majority in both houses.

Somebody on FB explained it better than I could...

Quote:

The government is shut down because it doesn’t have a complete budget.

A budget, and reconciliation of a budget, cannot be filibustered. That includes regular order appropriations — or spending.

We do not have a complete budget with the necessary appropriations.

We do not have a complete budget because the GOP cannot come up with a budget and appropriations it can get a majority of House members and 50 senators to agree on.

This is because the House is controlled by the freedom caucus, and they will not agree to a budget that does not massively reduce spending.

Because the Republicans can’t agree on or pass their own budget and appropriations bills — something they don’t want or need Democrats to do (in fact, they have repeatedly locked Democrats out of meetings) — they are running the government through short term spending bills (continuing resolutions).

Stand-alone spending bills (continuing resolutions, omnibus spending bills, one-time appropriations, etc.) CAN be filibustered. They require 60 votes in the Senate.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

I thought the 'no filibuster' rule could only be used once a year and McConnell blew it on the health care vote?

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35933429)

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...o-end-shutdown I wonder if Trump and/or the House Republicans will accept this?

Tomorrow mornings tweet will no doubt give us some idea.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35933449)

I thought the 'no filibuster' rule could only be used once a year and McConnell blew it on the health care vote?

No such rule exists like that that I’m aware of. Majority leader can raise a point of order to the presiding officer that a simple majority is required, they can deny it but it is then appealed by the chair, then appealed and overturned by majority vote.

GOP actually used the no filibuster on Supreme Court Justice Nominee, Neil Gorsuch, when Democrats filibustered during his confirmation in the Senate, he was confirmed by simple majority. 52/48.

It’s interesting to note that the filibuster rule is not in the Constitution. It was a rule created in the Senate in 1806, but strangely wasn’t used until the late 1830s, it was strengthened more in the 1970s. So when there is talk of going ‘Nuclear’, which is precisely what President Trump suggested should happen if the Stalemate and government shutdown had continued, is in essence to go Constitutional, by means of winning a vote by simple majority, or i.e 51.

Personally, I think it’s a stupid rule, it’s unconstitutional and I’m surprised it’s been allowed to pass as a legal qualifier when it comes to passing or rejecting legislation.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35933483)

They did something on the health care vote to allow it to pass with a sample majority. I think it might be making it a special budgetary vote.

Never mind, found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconc...ates_Congress)

So not the same thing I thought of it as but it does allow them to avoid a lot of this hassle so long as they make it a spending/budget thing and can only do so once a year.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35933493)

Never mind, found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconc...tates_Congress)

You have a space between congress and bracket.

EDIT It's actuall a bracket missing from the link.

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35933483)

The 60/40 rule was designed to promote bi-partisanship, rather than just one party (be it Democrats or Republicans) riding roughshod over the other; if you need the other party votes, you have to negotiate.

When people say there should be a simple majority vote, they are only looking short-term; what happens when the other party gets in with a majority? (as is looking likely for the Dems in the 2018 mid-terms).

This is why Mitch McConnell is against it - he can see it might be a short-term gain to get Republican bills through for a year, but it could come back to bite the Republicans in the bum in November...

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Another brilliant Trump idea, slap a tariff on imported washing machines and solar panels ! It's going the make the US great again !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42784380

It's certainly not going to go down well with anyone in the US needing a washing machine in the near future... Go Donald, hit the electorate in the pocket and spark off some revenge tariffs for US exports !

Wonder if Trump/ and or friends/family have shares in Whirlpool ? Up 2.5%....

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 35933506)

It's certainly not going to go down well with anyone in the US needing a washing machine in the near future.

You do realise that the USA does actually make it's own washing machines? :dozey:

Re: President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Quote:

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35933508)

You do realise that the USA does actually make it's own washing machines? :dozey:

Yes for which they can now increase the price :dozey: