The case against Trump

Legislative initiation of the impeachment process would probably be a somewhat effective start...

If Trump just continues to be Trump, it's likely that his pole numbers will go down to the point where the GOP will finally dump him.

Poll?

538:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo
​
 

>>>>>Poll?

Oops!

"What has to be found to remove him from office? "

More than will be "found".  Get over it already, Hillary lost and your "Arc of History" has been interrupted.  Honestly, you people are so banal it hurts to check in here every now and then.

this is not about hillary or obamma thom.

this is about collusion.

hostile foreign power interference.

you know, laws being broken.

its mind boggling really.

do  you believe in the constitution?

do you love your country?

then fucking get over this partisan simple minded binary black and white world view you and your so called "conservatives" cling to.

Manafort's balls are in a vice grip right now and if he has anything on Trump then he's fucked. 

Mueller drops charges against Rick Gates, court OKs Boston spring break trip

By DARREN SAMUELSOHN 02/27/2018 02:57 PM EST

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/27/rick-gates-charges-dropped-rob...

Thom is so deep in denial it's going to be a rough fall for the old man when Trump resigns in a few months.

Thom is a lost cause, will certainly plug his ears and yell FAKE NEWS just like his favorite delusional 71 year old hero on Penn Ave...

But anyone who's not in clinical denial -  read the following.

Cause like the gambler says
Read 'em and weep

What did Trump know, and when did he know it? - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/02/26/what-did-trum...

Two things happened over the weekend that complicate our understanding of President Trump’s awareness of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The first is that Trump was interviewed by Fox News’s Jeanine Pirro. She raised the question of collusion — that is, whether elements of the Trump campaign assisted the Russian effort to influence the results of the 2016 election.

“After 18 months, not any kind of reference to any collusion,” Pirro said.

To which Trump replied:

“That is true, Jeanine. You have all these committees, everybody’s looking. There is no collusion. No phone calls — I had no phone calls, no meetings, no nothing. There is no collusion. I say it all the time. Anybody that asks. There is no collusion.”

For some time, it’s been unclear exactly what Trump means when he says there was “no collusion” (as he often does). In January, the New York Times’s Maggie Haberman asked press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders what exactly was meant when Trump used the term.

“Look,” Sanders replied, “I think he’s stating for himself and to anything that he would be a part of, or know about, or have sanctioned. But that would be something that, again, I think he’s very clearly laid out he and his campaign had nothing to do with.”

To Pirro, Trump used a narrower definition: He himself made no phone calls and had no meetings related to Russian interference.

What that doesn’t cover, though, is whether there was tacit awareness of Russian interference efforts. Was Trump told that the Russians were trying to help him, perhaps even told about specific actions or information, and did nothing?

A review of Trump’s public comments from the database at Factba.sereveals no specific denial by Trump since Election Day that he knew about Russian interference during 2016.

So we turn to the other revelation from this weekend. The House Intelligence Committee released a memo from the Democratic minority outlining its response to allegations posed by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and his staff that the FBI’s investigation into Trump and his campaign were tainted by partisanship. Included in the new memo was a specific date that had been elusive: The counterintelligence operation looking at whether the Trump campaign aided Russia began on July 31, 2016.

Why is that important? For one thing, it clarifies the broader timeline of activity during the summer. But it also comes only four days after Trump, during his last news conference of the year, publicly requested that Russia release emails stolen from Hillary Clinton.

“By the way, they hacked — they probably have her 33,000 emails,” Trump said, referring to emails that were on Clinton’s private email server but that were determined not to be work-related by her attorneys and therefore were deleted. “I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted because you’d see some beauties there. So let’s see.”

This was days after WikiLeaks began dumping emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee, a hack that was already attributed publicly to Russia. Trump, as he would continue to do over the next year, denied that it was clear that Russia was involved. (“Let me tell you, it’s not even about Russia or China or whoever it is that’s doing the hacking,” he said. “It was about the things that were said in those emails.”)

Later, he issued a call to action: “I will tell you this — Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Four days later, the FBI began its investigation into whether the Trump team was aiding Russia’s interference effort.

The impetus for that investigation wasn’t Trump’s news conference, though, according to both the Democratic memo and Nunes’s — and according to reporting. It stemmed, instead, from comments made by George Papadopoulos, an adviser to the campaign, to an Australian diplomat in London that May.

At that point, Papadopoulos had been in contact with Russia-linked individuals for months and was working to set up a meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. He said he was pushing for it during a meeting of Trump’s foreign policy advisory team meeting that the candidate attended on March 31, 2016 — though it’s not clear if Trump was in the room when Papadopoulos raised the subject.

In late April, Papadopoulos’s main contact in London mentioned that the Russians had “dirt” on Clinton in the form of emails. Specifically, his contact told Papadopoulos that “they have dirt on her”; “the Russians had emails of Clinton”; “they have thousands of emails.”

The next day, Papadopoulos emailed senior campaign adviser Stephen Miller and told him that he had “some interesting messages coming in from Moscow about a trip when the time is right.”

Is that where it ended? Did Papadopoulos tell the campaign specifically about the stolen email messages? The next month, he told it to Australian High Commissioner to Great Britain Alexander Downer over drinks in London. Once the DNC leaks began, Australia tipped off the FBI about the conversation with Papadopoulos, and the investigation began. Is it likely that Papadopoulos told a foreign diplomat about what he had learned — but never told anyone else in the campaign? That never got back to Trump? Despite Trump saying that he believed the Russians to be in possession of Clinton emails — which the DNC leaks that were public on July 27 were not?

At that point, remember, the campaign was being run by Paul Manafort, who himself had ties to the Russian leadership, thanks to his years of work for oligarch Oleg Deripaska and on behalf of former Ukraine president Viktor Yanukovych, an ally of Putin’s.

In June, Manafort was one of three campaign representatives to meet with a Kremlin-linked attorney named Natalia Veselnitskaya and a lobbyist named Rinat Akhmetshin who is rumored to have ties to Russian intelligence. The other two campaign attendees were son-in-law Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. — the latter of whom was told explicitlythat the meeting was intended to share “dirt” on Clinton that would be provided by the Russian government as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

Trump Jr.’s response? “If it’s what you say it is, I love it.”

He tried repeatedly to downplay what was discussed in the meeting, notably offering conflicting explanations for its intent, but we’ll come back to that.

The meeting was finally set on June 7, 2016. That evening, Trump gave a speech in New Jersey after winning the primary in that state.

“The Clintons have turned the politics of personal enrichment into an art form for themselves,” he said, mentioning Clinton’s private email server. “Designed to keep her corrupt dealings out of the public record, putting the security of the entire country at risk, and a president in a corrupt system is totally protecting her — not right. I am going to give a major speech on probably Monday of next week, and we’re going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting. I wonder if the press will want to attend. Who knows?”

That speech didn’t happen the following Monday; over the weekend the massacre at Pulse nightclub in Orlando took place.

The Times asked Trump if he knew about the meeting at the time. He said he didn’t.

“It must have been … a very unimportant meeting, because I never even heard about it,” he said. “Nobody told me.”

So what was the speech he promised?

“There was something about the book, ‘Clinton Cash,’ came out,” he said. When the Times’s Peter Baker noted that the book had come out a year earlier, Trump explained: “We were developing a whole thing. There was something about ‘Clinton Cash.’”

On June 22, Trump gave a speech including critiques from the book. Our fact-checkers noted at the time that the speech’s central argument “ignores the fact that the actions of Clinton and Clinton Foundation have been heavily scrutinized over the years.”

Trump Jr. has denied telling his father about the meeting. The elder Trump, however, took an active hand in Trump Jr.’s initial response when the meeting came to light, reportedly dictating a statement that skipped over the fact that the conversation was predicated on the promise of dirt offered by the Russian government. Trump also repeatedly dismissed the idea that Trump Jr. had behaved inappropriately by taking the meeting.

“Most people would have taken that meeting,” the president said.

In July, campaign adviser Carter Page — the subject of the FBI surveillance warrant at the heart of the Nunes memo — traveled to Moscow with the campaign’s blessing. Two weeks later, Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer conducting research for Fusion GPS (on the dime of the DNC and Clinton’s campaign) was toldthat Page, too, had been informed of the existence of compromising material on Clinton. (The DNC leaks began three days later.)

Page denied meeting Kremlin official Igor Diveykin and told the House Intelligence Committee during testimony that he had only briefly greeted Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich during his trip.

After his return to the United States, though, Page sent the campaign a memo to say that he had spoken with Dvorkovich in a “private conversation” in which the deputy prime minister “expressed strong support for Mr. Trump.” He also sent an email to two campaign staffers saying that he would “send you guys a readout soon regarding some incredible insights and outreach I’ve received from a few Russian legislators and senior members” of the Putin administration.

Page explained to the House committee that he gleaned those insights from hearing speeches.

We’re asked to believe, then, that there were three instances in which Trump campaign staff were, or may have been, informed about potential dirt on Clinton that was being offered by the Russian government. That in the two cases where that clearly happened, that Trump himself was never informed of that incriminating information, even when one of the recipients of that offer was his own son.

These points of contact were embraced by at least two campaign staffers — Papadopoulos in April and Trump Jr. in June — and, probably, at least two more (Kushner and Manafort). We’re asked to believe, too, that even if Trump had been informed about any or all of the Russian outreach efforts, that this doesn’t constitute collusion on the part of the president with the Russian interference effort. (Though earlier this year, his press secretary articulated that it would.)

There are two groups of people who know how valid Trump’s argument is. The first is Trump and his close family. The other, it seems fair to assume, is special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and his team.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Once again:

You know, there's really no evidence of Trump colluding with Russia, except for the

Flynn Thing
Manafort Thing
Tillerson Thing
Sessions Thing
Kushner Thing
Wray Thing
Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius "Russian Law Firm of the Year" Thing
Carter Page Thing
Roger Stone Thing
Felix Sater Thing
Boris Epshteyn Thing
Rosneft Thing
Gazprom Thing (see above)
Sergey Gorkov banker Thing
Azerbaijan Thing
"I Love Putin" Thing
Lavrov Thing
Sergey Kislyak Thing
Oval Office Thing
Gingrich Kislyak Phone Calls Thing
Russian Business Interest Thing
Emoluments Clause Thing
Alex Schnaider Thing
Hack of the DNC Thing
Guccifer 2.0 Thing
Mike Pence "I don't know anything" Thing
Russians Mysteriously Dying Thing
Trump's public request to Russia to hack Hillary's email Thing
Trump house sale for $100 million at the bottom of the housing bust to the Russian fertilizer king Thing
Russian fertilizer king's plane showing up in Concord, NC during Trump rally campaign Thing
Nunes sudden flight to the White House in the night Thing
Nunes personal investments in the Russian winery Thing
Cyprus bank Thing
Trump not Releasing his Tax Returns Thing
the Republican Party's rejection of an amendment to require Trump to show his taxes thing
Election Hacking Thing
GOP platform change to the Ukraine Thing
Steele Dossier Thing
Sally Yates Can't Testify Thing
Intelligence Community's Investigative Reports Thing
Trump reassurance that the Russian connection is all "fake news" Thing
Chaffetz not willing to start an Investigation Thing
Chaffetz suddenly deciding to go back to private life in the middle of an investigation Thing
Appointment of Pam Bondi who was bribed by Trump in the Trump University scandal appointed to head the investigation Thing The White House going into cover-up mode, refusing to turn over the documents related to the hiring and firing of Flynn Thing
Chaffetz and White House blaming the poor vetting of Flynn on Obama Thing
Poland and British intelligence gave information regarding the hacking back in 2015 to Paul Ryan and he didn't do anything Thing
Agent M16 following the money thing
Trump team KNEW about Flynn's involvement but hired him anyway Thing
Let's Fire Comey Thing
Election night Russian trademark gifts Things
Russian diplomatic compound electronic equipment destruction Thing
let's give back the diplomatic compounds back to the Russians Thing
Let's Back Away From Cuba Thing
Donny Jr met with Russians Thing
Donny Jr emails details "Russian Government's support for Trump" Thing
Trump's secret second meeting with his boss Putin Thing

<<<<I earned my timeouts by not thinking or acting like you.

The case against Trump is now the case against Slacker. Open season!

How long can zoners ignore slackers questions?

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind The answer is blowin' in the wind.

I'm Waiting For Him TO REALLY PISS OFF A Secret Service Dude In Which Secret Service Dude Goes Postal On THAT CLOWN !

RICO Act?

the rat line leads to Trump

Let's not forget the indictments and guilty pleas, but yeah nothing to see here folks.

I would like to enter into evidence, Impeachment opposition's Exhibit A....

Mike Pence.

The answer my friend, is Blowin out your End....

>>>>>How long can Hope Hicks not answer questions? 

As long as she's being interviewed by the House Intelligence Committee...the most worthless group of legislators I can imagine.

She may as well just save it all for Mueller and protect her young career.

lol

>>>>Mike Pence

Trump's insurance policy.   I suspect the GOP will eventually grow weary of Trump and once he outlasts any purpose of having him around, they will get rid of him themselves.  

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/968468176639004672

The trouble with these threads is that a lot of rhetoric gets thrown around but nobody is ever able to give detailed point by point arguments backing their side. 

Sad! 

How many points per indictment?

More like snitch hunt dum dum Don!

Forget about impeachment. What do you want to rename the country that was formerly know as the United States of America?

No sarcasm here. I'm serious. 

United States of who's in control of congress

Snitch hunt winner...

Rick Gates May Have Sealed Trump's Fate Once and for All

A new report suggests the former aide has delivered the goods in the Mueller probe.

By Brad Reed / Raw Story February 27, 2018, 8:38 AM GMT

https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/rick-gates-may-have-sealed-tr...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mueller drops charges against Rick Gates, court OKs Boston spring break trip

By DARREN SAMUELSOHN 02/27/2018 02:57 PM EST

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/27/rick-gates-charges-dropped-rob...

Oaksterdam, very funny (Not so funny) appropriate renaming!

I May have Said It Before Slacker Is One Weirdo Clown ! NO It's Not Cool see pics above or DON'T

Slack what was that pissing match with chach all about?

lol (in honor of chach)

what did you say "that bitcoin was a strong sell"

Did chach get the extra 2 minutes for instigating or was is matching minor penalties?

>>What do you want to rename the country that was formerly know as the United States of America?

>>No sarcasm here. I'm serious. 

I vote for: 'The Divided State of Dolladolla Bill Y'all'

Or how about... Citiwalamazogoog?

Muellerica

i better get some guns while they're cheap...

The left’s fever dream of Mueller indicting Trump won’t happen, even if he finds something. Here’s why

Thus far, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has not alleged any criminal collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. But what if he does?

Well, if he follows past Justice Department legal guidance adopted by the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), the answer in regard to the president is pretty much: “Nothing.”

Long ago, back in the Nixon era, OLC concluded that indicting or criminally prosecuting a sitting president would violate the Constitution by undermining “the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions.”

The progressive left knows they don’t have the political power inside Congress to impeach President Trump. But they openly fantasize that Mueller will one day indict him on charges of criminal conspiracy.  This, they think, would lead either to his conviction and removal from office, or so severely handicap his presidency that he would be forced to resign.

Unhappily for the left, Mueller, as a special counsel at Justice, is obligated to follow departmental policies.

The bottom line is that no matter what evidence Mueller turns up, he can’t indict the president if he follows DOJ policy unless that policy is changed by the Deputy Attorney General or the Attorney General.   According to the Justice Department, the only way a president can be removed from office is through impeachment, and that process has never once ousted a president.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/26/left-s-fever-dream-mueller-ind...

But hey, don't let that dream die!

Holy crap, Thom.

As much as I'd like to see him hauled off in handcuffs, all that matters to me is that he's hamstrung while in office, abandoned by the more level-headed GOPers in Congress, and booted out by a strong majority in 2020. He will never resign, even if it's "best" for the GOP. He has no loyalty to anyone but himself.

>> i better get some guns while they're cheap...

California gun laws prohibit individuals from owning, possessing, or purchasing a gun if they have been convicted of certain offenses. Though California Penal Code 29800 is commonly known as the “felon with a firearm law”, the law also applies to those who have been convicted of certain misdemeanor offenses. Under PC 29800, it is a felony offense to have a gun or ammunition if you have any prior felony offense.

Acknowledgement

That was Baggenhammers  most well reasoned  post in quite a while and seems accurate ...   Linking  the fox news article gets him a small demerit just for the source do the grade slips to A-

he could very easily be punished (and should be )  when he is out of office I firmly believe that

(LOL dictation said treasoned when I said reasoned)

Acknowledgement

That was Baggenhammers  most well reasoned  post in quite a while and seems accurate ...   Linking  the fox news article gets him a small demerit just for the source do the grade slips to A-

he could very easily be punished (and should be )  when he is out of office I firmly believe that

(LOL dictation said treasoned when I said reasoned)

 Apparently Viva thought the complement  was worth posting twice

did ender just call me a felon?

hey, fuck you.

Or, a certain misdemeanor offender. He's very technical.

Huh? You posted about doing time before. Didn't realized you cared, sorry dude.

just make everyone a felon 

problem solved 

>You posted about doing time before<

lol.

Maybe he's thinking about you sleeping in a tent with Nick for a week.

So what kind of gun are you getting?

i don't know. what are your recs?

always liked berettas...

or a sawed off shotgun.

question ender...

when your home was robbed, how did your gun do for protection?

if you were not home...but say you were home...

how effective would it be for you to unlock your gun safe, and load up?

curious.

>>if you were not home...but say you were home...

That happened and I started a thread about it at the time. I had someone try to pry my bedroom window open in the middle of the night.  My wife heard it, pulled up the blinds and was face to face with a guy trying to get in. She woke me up and I got into the safe in  around 40 seconds. The guy had already ran away by that time. The cops took forever to show up. 

So the gun is slow, but the police are WAY slower and they don't give a rats ass about you. Biometric locked gun safes will give you quick access though. I just don't trust the shit when it comes to my children's well being.

And yeah, buy a shotgun.

hmm biometric. makes sense.

Mossberg's rock. Can't go wrong with just about any model

Vegas should start taking odds on trump getting impeached

I say Thom's BS is BS - consider the racist source of his post:

 The article he sites was written by Hans A. von Spakovsky.

Von Spakovsky served as Republican Party chairman in Fulton County, Georgia, and as a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Registration and Election Board, where he championed strict voter-identification laws. Von Spakovsky became a member of Voting Integrity Project, which investigated alleged voter fraud across the United States, as well as a member of the politically conservative Federalist Society.

On February 22, 2017, Von Spakovsky sent an email arguing against the appointment of Democrats and "mainstream Republicans" to the Trump administration's Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The email was forwarded to U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions by an aide. The release of the email led civil rights leaders to call for Von Spakovsky to step down from the commission and for the commission to be disbanded.

Spakovsky was hired to the Justice Department as an expert on elections, and he advocated for what he described as the application of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 in a "race-neutral manner." Von Spakovsky's tenure at the Justice Department was marked by a focus on voter eligibility and voter fraud. In 2005, he led the Department's approval of a controversial Georgia law requiring voters to produce photo ID, despite strong objections from Justice Department staff that the law would disproportionately harm and disenfranchise African-American voters.

Spakovsky has promoted "the myth that Democratic voter fraud is common, and that it helps Democrats win elections". According to Professor Richard L. Hasen, an election-law expert at the University of California at Irvine, "there are a number of people who have been active in promoting false and exaggerated claims of voter fraud and using that as a pretext to argue for stricter voting and registration rules. And von Spakovsky’s at the top of the list."Hasen said that Spakovsky's appointment to Donald Trump's Commission on Election Integrity was a “a big middle finger” from Trump to people “serious about fixing problems with our elections.”

So....this guy is a died in the wool Trumper and an all around scumbag and liar. 

I will ask again Thom, but I know you won't reply...

What do you like about Trump?

He's so honest!

Face it Thom, if Obama did 1/10th of the shit Trump has done during this first year, you'd be calling for him to be imprisoned,

 then executed for crimes against the country. And so would many on the "left."

Weak sauce for constantly defending this guy.

Rick Gates singing like Opera Man.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-28/more-than-30-white-house-aides-said-to-lose-top-secret-clearance

>So....this guy is a died in the wool Trumper and an all around scumbag and liar. 

Conspiracy Theory Thom basically.

Sad. 

How many racists post here? That word is thrown around a lot here. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/amp/mueller-asking-what-trump-knew-about-hacked-emails-n851941

>>How many racists post here? That word is thrown around a lot here. 

I have noticed that for the last 5 years or so, especially in areas with previously open-minded people, it's used to label people simply on the basis political disagreement.  Way more than in its' genuine meaning... It's actually losing bite due to the nationwide over-(ab)use as the go-to idealogical defense tactic.

As if things weren't confusing enough, EVERYONE needs to read the transcript from the round table he just had with Congress today...   I'm in shock myself just with his candor, and who knows WHAT to think about the guy now!?!?   We all know Left is the new Right, but up is the new down after reading this.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/28/17064540/donald-trump-...

The only thing left worth arguing over seems to be if you believe he was being truly sincere or not.   I was never a fan of the man, but THIS is the kind of thing that piques my interest in any rogue presidency.     He's not beholden to many of the conventional powerful forces in American politics.   

It sounds like he's fixin' to blindsidedly bitchslap all his strongest supporters, and maybe even become the hero of all his biggest detractors and anti-gun folks nationwide.    Hell, he almost already has with such comments on record... Crazy times.  Coming months are going to be huge from the sound of things.  Let's see what he does with it.

Read the link?

TL:DR - What he said at the meeting is downright scary if you're a 2A supporter.    Heads must be rolling right now.    And if he's for real, just wow.

I personally don't agree with the apparent direction and tone of some of his statements, but I find myself cheering just to see the first hint of a possible break in the historic stalemate and crippling partisanship that is politics in this country.  Even if it's on a point I don't agree with.    Times are weird now, but there may be some seriously weirder times ahead...

If played right during the election cycle, this could seriously even turn the tides against him for re-election.

His comments today would be political suicide for any Republican if made during a campaign.   Fact.

If played right during the election cycle, this could seriously even turn the tides against him for re-election.

His comments today would be political suicide for just about any Republican if made during a campaign, and definitely if he'd made them during his last one.   Fact.

The news is saying that Trump is getting ready to replace McMaster's as the head of the NSA. This is the job that Flynn originally had. Here is the leading candidate to replace McMaster

A leading candidate to become President Donald Trump’s third national security adviser is the auto industry executive Stephen Biegun

Mr. Biegun, born 1963, graduated from the University of Michigan where he studied Political Science and Russian Language [...] and is a member of the boards of the US-Russia Foundation for Economic Development and the Rule of Law, the Moscow School of Politics, Freedom House, the US-Russia Business Council, the US-ASEAN Business Council and FordSollers, Ford Motor Company’s joint venture operating in the Russia Federation.

You can't make this stuff up