President Trump & U.S Election 2016 Investigation

Love Bovril myself.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

And most sane people hate Marmite

Love it myself

Those who don't like it do seem to have a taste for sour grapes .

[Stephen]

So North Korea are working on new ICBMs apparently.

North Korea 'working on new missiles', US officials say - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45015343

Stuff happening again with Mueller .

On Monday a new line of defence was taken up: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wire...point-56919853

Saying collusion is not a crime (in truth, at the article above states, it depends).

Now Trump is telling Sessions to end the investigation 'right now'. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trum...ry?id=56962100

Not sure if this is a sign the investigation has taken a turn or anything.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...et-queen-says/

Donald Trump has rejected reports that he was late to meet the Queen as "fake disgusting news", explaining that it was actually the Queen who made him wait...

..."I was about 15 minutes early and I'm waiting with my wife and that's fine. Hey, it's the Queen, right? We can wait. But I'm a little early."...

..."So here was the story by the fake news: The president was 15 minutes late for the Queen. Wrong.

And then here's the rest of the story. So they said I was late when I was actually early, number one. Number two, I guess the meeting was scheduled for 15 minutes and it lasted for almost an hour. The president overstayed!".

Why does he lie about silly things like this? We all saw the Queen on live TV waiting for over 10 minutes for him - were he and Melania hiding behind the planters?

[1andrew1]

The BBC said he was on time. Cannot post link at the moment but it's on www.bbc.co.uk/news

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The BBC said he was on time. Cannot post link at the moment but it's on www.bbc.co.uk/news

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-45058002

Claim: President Trump says he was not late for the Queen when they met in July, in fact he was early.

Reality Check verdict: The president arrived and met the Queen on time, according to the official schedule. However, he didn't arrive 15 minutes early at Windsor.

[ianch99]

Please be upstanding for the respected President of the United States of America:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...29583672307712

When you give a crazed, crying lowlife a break, and give her a job at the White House, I guess it just didn’t work out. Good work by General Kelly for quickly firing that dog!

I wonder when the last POTUS called a (black) woman a "dog" as a Presidential official statement?

[Chloé Palmas]

To be fair, Ormaroso is not even fit to be called a dog...

I have to admit, I don't like Tamara Holder's views on abortion much but the minute that she started talking about Tamara's boobs on air, I about gave up on the woman ever saying anything productive:

Get to about 1 20 in the clip or so.

(No nudity but it is probably not safe for work if your employer is leery of retards):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVfh_34YX_4

It does raise some very serious questions as to why Trump would hire someone for a 4th time, having fired her 3 times on a reality TV show, before. This job is actually serious.

Then there is the security element which former DNI head James Clapper addressed:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/13/p...ngs/index.html

https://hotair.com/headlines/archive...s-unthinkable/

“It’s a very serious and egregious security violation,” Clapper said on CNN’s “Erin Burnett OutFront” of bringing a phone into the White House Situation Room.

“It’s sort of an honor system where everybody knows not to do that.”…

Clapper added, “You’re expected as a responsible member of the President’s security team not to do that. … So it’s just kind of unthinkable that that would happen.”

Clapper's comments are spot on.

You just don't do what she did - which raises questions abiut the internal security set up at the WH.

This even led to Michael Cohen saying that she was full of shit:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ivists-it.html

Cohen's legal troubles have tested his past loyalty to the president, leading some Washington-watchers to speculate that he might turn on his old boss by helping Special Counsel Robert Mueller with his lengthy Russia probe.

The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York is reportedly investigating him for bank fraud and campaign finance violations in connection with a six-figure hush money payout he made in 2016 on Trump's behalf to a pornographic actress. The woman, who goes by the stage name Stormy Daniels, had claimed she slept with the then-future-president a decade earlier.

Cohen's position – on the outside of the White House looking in, facing a lengthy prison term and the loss of his law license for making tapes of his clients – makes his dismissal of Manigault Newman's latest claim all the more remarkable.

Cohen flipped on Trump and even he was like "woah, no way did I see that" (or words to that effect) when she tried to use him as a corroborative witness.

I have as many issues with Trump on certain issues as anyone but that piece of filth as never anyone I would use as an example of it. Almost everyone on the planet disapproves of her role in this, and the biggest criticism of Trump is that he hired her in the first place (so many times lol).

I agree her actions are completely inappropriate, and probably illegal (taking a recording device into a SCIF), but the language by Trump is not appropriate, especially in an official statement (which the White House said his tweeted were).

[Chloé Palmas]

When has it ever been, though? In that sense, it is no different with her, just a lot more justified...

In regards to the recordings, a bunch of states have one party recording laws where they are violations unless both parties consent but that (I think) is just for phone calls not just a call spoken in person but I will have to double check / get back to you on that.

After Watergate it did lead to the WPA and what not, but the biggest issue in communication came from within the issue of whether digitized communication differed from in person. Loads of states (20+) have remedied this but at the federal level it never will be as it requires altering / defining the 4th amendment, which will never be done.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I agree her actions are completely inappropriate, and probably illegal (taking a recording device into a SCIF), but the language by Trump is not appropriate, especially in an official statement (which the White House said his tweeted were).

Very true. It is patently obvious that she was not fit to work in the White House which sort of compounds Trump's mistakes here as, surely, he was part of the decision making process to appoint her.

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Mick

I would have to completely disagree with that - America was divisive during the Obama Admin - remember, Black lives matter formed under his Administration, not Trump's - There will still be a divide long after Trump leaves office in 2020/2024.

Very true as we live in hyper partisan times...same through the Bush years, too. (Over Iraq etc).

If Trump is removed from Office before an election cycle - there will be the next American Civil war, bit like if Brexit does not happen here, there will be riots and civil unrest here.

Maybe the odd kook but we'll never see it on a large scale here...mostly because we're a very passive people.

If Trump is removed in a form that involves violence (assassination etc), then yes...there will be all kinds of hell to pay in the 48 contiguous states.

If it is through more traditional methods (impeachment for example) it'll depend on the legitimacy of the (for example) trial in the senate. If it doesn't look like a total stitch up or a very partisan vote then it should keep the peace.

If it looks like a dud vote, then yes a show trial will lead the WN's out and there could be riots in the streets.

Same will never happen here though, and it is a given that in some way shape or form, we're either not going to leave the EU or totally mess up leaving.

Originally Posted by Hugh

I agree her actions are completely inappropriate, and probably illegal (taking a recording device into a SCIF), but the language by Trump is not appropriate, especially in an official statement (which the White House said his tweeted were).

Trump calls a lot of people dog for some reason, it's one of his phrases.

Her actions were very inappropriate. Apparently it wasn't illegal which itself is bizarre. Taping inside the situation room?! It's an egregious national security risk. Not to mention how is anyone meant to govern if they can't speak candidly just in case one of their co-workers is recording them?

She was well out of line.

Trump certainly deserves some blame too since it was never clear what on earth her credentials were to work in the White House other than she was on TV with him. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

The language of the Tweet won't be a problem for him, people are used to that. The hiring decision won't be a problem, people are used to that too. The real question is if any of these tapes exist. The racial one was rumoured in the run up to the election in 2016. However you always get these rumours during an election. In the run up to the 2012 election the internet had this big rumour of Michelle Obama using racist words which never came up.

So we'll see. At the moment the bigger story to me is the national security issue.

Even I have to agree calling an ex-Aide a "dog" is highly inappropriate and far from presidential, although I am not surprised that Trump is more unhinged these days, after the constant attacks from every angle and plus, he is getting over confident attacking the Russia investigation, attacking Jeff Sessions at least twice in the last few week, he if he is not careful he will give Mueller the ammunition he needs to put a case forward for Obstruction of Justice by constantly attacking the DOJ and the people involved in the investigation.