President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

[Lutherf]

Originally Posted by Mick

The Senate Trial isn't like a court of legal proceedings - there is evidence based facts sharing, however, it's the votes that matter and it's purely political - a president can be completely innocent of the charges being levied against him, it's not like a criminal trial where once convicted, there is an appeal.

---------- Post added at 17:53 ---------- Previous post was at 17:46 ----------

Hearing on grapevine Special Counsel, Mueller could be about to claim Donald Trump Jnr lied to Congress. Not being reported on any news outlet yet...

There was a report in The Hill on Trump Jr back in May. Mueller may be looking at it but he'll need to come up with something serious if they're going to use it against him. While something as innocuous as Sessions meeting Kislyak at some press conference might have got the desired recusal that's unlikely to be enough to hang serious criminal charges on Trump Jr.

At some point the insanity of all this needs to stop. It's just unrealistic to expect someone to recall not only every contact they made during a campaign but also the content of every discussion and the background of everyone they interacted with.

Originally Posted by Lutherf

At some point the insanity of all this needs to stop. It's just unrealistic to expect someone to recall not only every contact they made during a campaign but also the content of every discussion and the background of everyone they interacted with.

If you're in a Presidential campaign you should be careful who you arrange meetings with and be meticulous in recording that.

If you're then going under oath to testify about these things you should have good lawyers and be careful what you say.

[Lutherf]

Originally Posted by Damien

If you're in a Presidential campaign you should be careful who you arrange meetings with and be meticulous in recording that.

If you're then going under oath to testify about these things you should have good lawyers and be careful what you say.

Of course you should be careful but the reality of the situation is that you're quite likely to be at an event with hundreds of people who want to meet you. You are also likely to be in meetings with people you don't know and are only tangentially engaged with. For example, you may be invited to a certain foreign policy meeting where you aren't the principle and don't intend to engage but are asked what seems to be an innocuous question or two. I've been there with state and local campaigns I worked on so I can only imagine how impossible it would be during a presidential campaign.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45286906

US Attorney General Jeff Sessions has responded to Donald Trump's latest attack on him by insisting that the justice department he heads will not bend to political pressure.

The apparent rebuke of Mr Trump came after the president made personal comments about him during an interview.

[Lutherf]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45286906

I have a hard time even imagining what the relationship is like between Trump and Sessions. To call it antagonistic would be an understatement. I also don't understand what Sessions is doing. He seems to be entirely hands off on all issues that come up. Theoretically he's been focused on gang violence but one certainly wouldn't notice that from reading the papers. He is also supposed to have been involved in immigration reform but, again, I sure don't see the results.

I'm not saying that I want an activist running the DoJ but it would be nice to have someone that at least lets us know he's breathing every once in a while.

Sessions is just protecting himself by playing it safe and by the book. If the investigation turns up anything then he doesn't want to be on the hook for trying to have stopped it. Attorney General is a serious and important job, what does Sessions have to gain by being dodgy? Much better for him to get be fired than fire.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

My whole point over all this, and l have said before that DT has used financial muscle to win the election. He condemned Hilary Clinton. And saying that she should go to prison. She has stayed silent and dignified.

She hasn't slagged Trump off. Yet we have DT in the American papers, saying that he has the RIGHT to play a certain right to play a musician's song at his rallies.

The musician has stated that he doesn't want DT to play his music at Political rallies. DT has gone along and keeps playing them

DT thinks he can get away with everything. Even on Tv, if you look closely, he looks as though he spends most of his time under a sun tan lamp.

I am NOT American, but l hate the man, because he is going to bring a lot of trouble for the States. And other people will pay the price.

He has covered his tracks. But, l have a sneeky feeling that someone will crack and start talking. BUT, the house of senate is all REPUBLICAN and wont go against there man.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

My whole point over all this, and l have said before that DT has used financial muscle to win the election.

Garbage, he spent less actual money than any other previous President to get elected.

He condemned Hilary Clinton. And saying that she should go to prison. She has stayed silent and dignified.

What planet are you living on?? Dignified? She is the most undignified, vile, sorry excuse for a slut shaming, disgrace to real women, ever to have sought the Presidency...leave along won the nomination. (All while claiming to be in favor of the rights of women). :rollseyes:

As for silent...she hasn't managed to keep that little hole in her head shut for more than a day since getting beaten. Either in claiming the Russians outright stole it, to claiming that every other reason she lost was some kind of bad thing (sexism / the FBI / the media etc etc).

She hasn't slagged Trump off.

Holy shit, is it worth carrying on this conversation with you? Or do you want me to break the bandwidth of the site, citing every example going back 19 months?

Look that is just the first 3 lines of your post. I almost never put anyone on ignore but if that is your serious point of view I will just lump your commentary as worthless. Let me know, before I carry on.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Garbage, he spent less actual money than any other previous President to get elected.


What planet are you living on?? Dignified? She is the most undignified, vile, sorry excuse for a slut shaming, disgrace to real women, ever to have sought the Presidency...leave along won the nomination. (All while claiming to be in favor of the rights of women). :rollseyes:

As for silent...she hasn't managed to keep that little hole in her head shut for more than a day since getting beaten. Either in claiming the Russians outright stole it, to claiming that every other reason she lost was some kind of bad thing (sexism / the FBI / the media etc etc).



Holy shit, is it worth carrying on this conversation with you? Or do you want me to break the bandwidth of the site, citing every example going back 19 months?

Look that is just the first 3 lines of your post. I almost never put anyone on ignore but if that is your serious point of view I will just lump your commentary as worthless. Let me know, before I carry on.

I can see you don't know Arthur yet Chloe. He's a bit of a legend on here. You'll get used to him eventually.
telfordcable is another. They'd make a good double act!

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Damien

To be clear I don't think impeachment should happen here unless a serious crime in proven.

The tide has turned - it may have been warranted before but this last week showed that Trump can ride this out pretty easily. Not necessarily due to him but Cohen tried to get cute and just threw himself to the wolves, admitting to doing something wrong which he accused Trump of being party to, without being able to prove it. So now, we all know Cohen did do it, but are we going to believe a soon to be convicted felon that the President put him up to it? Trump is going to be fin for the foreseeable future. Somehow, Cohen has managed to secure that for him.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

My whole point over all this, and l have said before that DT has used financial muscle to win the election. He condemned Hilary Clinton. And saying that she should go to prison. She has stayed silent and dignified.

She has done no such thing - she wrote a bloody book. Goes on and on about losing an election she was meant to win.

You do know she got the questions to the debate with Bernie Sanders don't you?

You're not suppose to see the questions, the element of surprise etc but she got them putting Sanders at a disadvantage. That's called cheating!!!

You do know she paid for the FAKE Russian dossier on Trump, along with her party, the DNC. Fake Intel obtained from Russians via Steele, that's the real collusion, so enough of this, she is dignified bollocks - she doesn't know the meaning of the bloody word.

Jeez man, Arthur - you are really showing that you don't know what you're talking about, carry on watching the latest soaps dude. We get that you don't like Trump but stop making stuff up as you are making yourself look very silly.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Stephen

So Trump now contradicting himself yet again.

It was no I didn't know about any money or pay outs to oh yeah the money came from me.

What a total idiot.

No. He said he reimbursed Cohen for the money that Cohen paid to Daniels and McDougal. Cohen is the one who claims that Trump instructed him to do as much (effectively confirming his own guilt in the process). Did Trump ever admit to colluding / instructing Cohen to make the payment? Lanny Davis released some mumbled recording - that is about it. Trump has said that he reimbursed Cohen - that is totally different to saying "Yeah, I knew about it at the time, told him to do it, etc etc". You have to parse the words very carefully - Rudy might be coaching him but this is exactly what he said:

“Later on I knew, later on,” Trump told Fox & Friends. “What [Cohen] did — and they weren’t taken out of the campaign finance, that’s the big thing. That’s a much bigger thing.

If you are a lawyer you need to do more than just run a two bit taxi medallion service.

Trump’s remarks contradict Cohen’s statement, made under oath in a federal court, in which he said that Trump instructed him to make the payments.
Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations, tax evasion and bank fraud. His plea deal states that the payments were made specifically to influence the 2016 presidential election by covering up Trump’s alleged extramarital affairs.
Trump has accused Cohen of making up stories in order to secure a deal from prosecutors.

Cohen has made accusations which have confessed his own guilt which he tried to tie Trump to. Trump has made absolutely no statement corroborating it as such.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4403175/t...gn-violations/

Cohen is a moron.

[Angua]

Looks like Trumps sabre rattling over the markets plummeting is up to his usual blowhard standards.

As for what Trump says and when, I doubt he can even remember, as he only ever says what suits him at the time.

Amusing opinion piece on how the press and Trump spokespeople would react if Trump shot Cohen in broad daylight.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Damien

I agree it won't happen though. For a start neither the Republicans nor Democrats seem to want it. At the moment the Democrats probably prefer him to stay in place.

Kind of like how Hillary was the best friend of the GOP? I mean let's face it, the only reason that Trump is President is because he ran against her...

Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas

Kind of like how Hillary was the best friend of the GOP? I mean let's face it, the only reason that Trump is President is because he ran against her...

The Democrats will worry that attempting to impeach Trump will motivate his base to turn out in November, they might also prefer to face a scandal-hit Trump in 2020 than a new candidate. Also many are probably sensible enough to see the possible ramifications of it and be uneasy with removing a President without sufficient reason.